West Midlands Trains London - Rugeley TV service to be split

Prestige15 · 4 Oct 2019

Some may already know but i only found out today that West Midlands Trains is to split its LNR London Euston - Rugeley Trent Valley service, due to poor performance and its apparent 5 mins turnover at Rugeley.

It is expected to be on the next timetable a hourly London - Walsall and back to its original Rugeley - Birmingham.

Isit the right move by them?

RailUK Forums

Gerald Fiennes · 4 Oct 2019

Yes. There is nothing wrong with changing trains. The question now is whether even a Walsall - London can be operated reliably through the Coventry Corridor I would say that was 50/50 at best, given the volume of traffic on this section.

Stampy · 4 Oct 2019

I've tried catching this train twice in recent weeks between Northampton - Rugeley TV, and never completed it yet..

1st time - we were turned back at Hednesford due to a failed train in front of us near Bescot - so we were running 20 mins late.
2nd time - cancelled at Walsall due to a late departure from Birmingham New Street.

Geezertronic · 4 Oct 2019

Gerald Fiennes said:
Yes. There is nothing wrong with changing trains. The question now is whether even a Walsall - London can be operated reliably through the Coventry Corridor I would say that was 50/50 at best, given the volume of traffic on this section.

Wouldn't it just be an extension of the existing Birmingham New Street to London Euston?

Lozzy0603 · 4 Oct 2019

Yes it's absolubtly the right thing to do. The train either picks up delays London - Coventry, Coventry - Birmingham or Birmingham to Rugeley. It's not been reliable since they launched it.
The only other way would be to have 20/30minute wait at Birmingham and or Coventry to allow the trains to make up time, which clearly can't be done because of the lack of available platform space.
It would be nice to have through trains, but it just isn't possible on current infrastructure.
They could look at this plan again if Birmingham to Coventry ever gets four-tracked.

furnessvale · 4 Oct 2019

Perhaps they should take the opportunity to make a connection from the branch to mainline at TV.

I've never needed to use it, but it must be frustrating for pax to see the Euston accelerating away just as they enter TV.

Bletchleyite · 4 Oct 2019

furnessvale said:
Perhaps they should take the opportunity to make a connection from the branch to mainline at TV.

There is one (northbound). But I can't see a case for using it for through services.

sufian123 · 4 Oct 2019

Prestige15 said:
Some may already know but i only found out today that LNWR is to split its Lonon - Rugeley Trent Valley due to poor performance and its apparent 5 mins turnover at Rugeley.

It is expected to be on the next timetable a hourly London - Walsall and back to its original Rugeley - Birmingham.

Isit the right move by them?

correction it will be from May 2020 timetable change long time till it happens . Mps are trying to get it done for this year. But no luck as far as I heard. Shuttle to either airport or new st. A service to Walsall and Euston.

Prestige15 · 4 Oct 2019

Geezertronic said:
Wouldn't it just be an extension of the existing Birmingham New Street to London Euston?

It was with the Rugeley along with to Crewe and Liverpool so as far i can remember no LNWR apart from a handfull from Euston terminates at Birmingham to free up capacity at New Street.

6026KingJohn · 4 Oct 2019

What is happening is that the Wolverhampton - Walsall train leaving New Street at xx27 will now take the path of the xx20 to Rugeley (calling at Tame Bridge Parkway only) and the xx20 to Rugeley (the split off the Crewe train) will be the all stations to Walsall at xx27
At the moment if the xx20 is delayed, the stopping train leaves first and the Rugeley train (being stuck behind it) can not get to Tame Bridge Parkway (first stop) earlier than about 20 min late resulting in the train turning at Hednesford.
According to RTT this is happening from the Dec 19 timetable as it is just a switch of paths.
What is happening to the other Rugeley train is unclear, possibly this is the May 2020 change

A0wen · 4 Oct 2019

It's a bit of a mess at the moment - what they should probably do is divert the Crewe via Potteries line onto the Trent Valley at Stafford, which would increase the service between Stafford & Rugby to every 30 mins - then run that via Northampton to London.

Then they need to work out what the WM locals and London services need to be - because at the moment all they're doing is extending trains which used to terminate at New Street to exotic destinations like Rugeley or Walsall - which means if they're late coming up from London it stuffs the local service reliability as well as having absurdly long journey times.

Perhaps not spending a squillion quid on HS2 and instead 4 tracking Rugby - Birmingham entirely might be a better idea.

RealTrains07 · 4 Oct 2019

Hopefully post may2020 not having to split with the rugeley train will make the crewe one more reliable?

sufian123 · 4 Oct 2019

6026KingJohn said:
What is happening is that the Wolverhampton - Walsall train leaving New Street at xx27 will now take the path of the xx20 to Rugeley (calling at Tame Bridge Parkway only) and the xx20 to Rugeley (the split off the Crewe train) will be the all stations to Walsall at xx27
At the moment if the xx20 is delayed, the stopping train leaves first and the Rugeley train (being stuck behind it) can not get to Tame Bridge Parkway (first stop) earlier than about 20 min late resulting in the train turning at Hednesford.
According to RTT this is happening from the Dec 19 timetable as it is just a switch of paths.
What is happening to the other Rugeley train is unclear, possibly this is the May 2020 change

the other one xx24 past from Euston-Crewe remains the same. Euston-Crewe will spilt at new st with a portion calling all stations to Walsall. Wolves all station will now continue to Rgl. After May 2020 none will be going or from Euston.

The Planner · 4 Oct 2019

A0wen said:
Perhaps not spending a squillion quid on HS2 and instead 4 tracking Rugby - Birmingham entirely might be a better idea.

Some of it could be solved by changing the regulation at Rugby, a lot cheaper than 4 tracking.

A0wen · 4 Oct 2019

The Planner said:
Some of it could be solved by changing the regulation at Rugby, a lot cheaper than 4 tracking.

More than happy to concede to someone who knows more than me!

What kind of changes would achieve that out of interest?

johnnychips · 4 Oct 2019

Hi @The Planner like A0wen I wondered what you meant by this?

The Planner · 5 Oct 2019

A0wen said:
More than happy to concede to someone who knows more than me!

What kind of changes would achieve that out of interest?

johnnychips said:
Hi @The Planner like A0wen I wondered what you meant by this?

One of the issues is the xx.23 from Euston, if that is late at Rugby (xx.14) then the LNWR Liverpool which leaves Rugby xx.18 is held. The Liverpool is effectively an all station stopper down the Cov corridor and has the xy.07 all station Wolves behind it at New St. If the Liverpool is late then it goes behind the Wolves local basically killing its path. This also then in turn hits the Virgin Anglo Scot behind it which leaves New St at xx.15. If the Virgin gets hit too much by around 10 minutes then once its as far away as Euxton it starts to get put behind the TPE to Scotland. It is down to a decision whether the Virgin going as far as Brum is a PPM failure or the Liverpool is. Not suggesting an answer, but the snowball effect is quite big.

A0wen · 5 Oct 2019

The Planner said:
One of the issues is the xx.23 from Euston, if that is late at Rugby (xx.14) then the LNWR Liverpool which leaves Rugby xx.18 is held. The Liverpool is effectively an all station stopper down the Cov corridor and has the xy.07 all station Wolves behind it at New St. If the Liverpool is late then it goes behind the Wolves local basically killing its path. This also then in turn hits the Virgin Anglo Scot behind it which leaves New St at xx.15. If the Virgin gets hit too much by around 10 minutes then once its as far away as Euxton it starts to get put behind the TPE to Scotland. It is down to a decision whether the Virgin going as far as Brum is a PPM failure or the Liverpool is. Not suggesting an answer, but the snowball effect is quite big.

Maybe full 4 tracking would be overkill - but would targetted 4 tracking, for example at stations like Marston Green help, which would allow stoppers to be looped out the way of faster services?

Class 170101 · 5 Oct 2019

The Planner said:
One of the issues is the xx.23 from Euston, if that is late at Rugby (xx.14) then the LNWR Liverpool which leaves Rugby xx.18 is held. The Liverpool is effectively an all station stopper down the Cov corridor and has the xy.07 all station Wolves behind it at New St. If the Liverpool is late then it goes behind the Wolves local basically killing its path. This also then in turn hits the Virgin Anglo Scot behind it which leaves New St at xx.15. If the Virgin gets hit too much by around 10 minutes then once its as far away as Euxton it starts to get put behind the TPE to Scotland. It is down to a decision whether the Virgin going as far as Brum is a PPM failure or the Liverpool is. Not suggesting an answer, but the snowball effect is quite big.

But surely that is poor regulation? Shouldn't the LNWR Liverpool be allowed to leave on time from Rugby and be looped at Coventry for the late running xx23 or even Birmingham International if the xx23 is very late?

Ianno87 · 5 Oct 2019

Class 170101 said:
But surely that is poor regulation? Shouldn't the LNWR Liverpool be allowed to leave on time from Rugby and be looped at Coventry for the late running xx23 or even Birmingham International if the xx23 is very late?

Problem is that the XC from Bournemouth appears at Coventry Platform 4 about the same time as well, taking out the looping opportunity there.

Class 170101 · 5 Oct 2019

Ianno87 said:
Problem is that the XC from Bournemouth appears at Coventry Platform 4 about the same time as well, taking out the looping opportunity there.

I guess there is no access to Platforms 1/2 from Coventry (not 100% clear on Open Train Times)

The Planner · 5 Oct 2019

Class 170101 said:
I guess there is no access to Platforms 1/2 from Coventry (not 100% clear on Open Train Times)

Not from Rugby, nor Leamington.

The Planner · 5 Oct 2019

The Planner said:
Some of it could be solved by changing the regulation at Rugby, a lot cheaper than 4 tracking.

Class 170101 said:
But surely that is poor regulation? Shouldn't the LNWR Liverpool be allowed to leave on time from Rugby and be looped at Coventry for the late running xx23 or even Birmingham International if the xx23 is very late?

Which is what I said.

London Trains · 5 Oct 2019

The Planner said:
One of the issues is the xx.23 from Euston, if that is late at Rugby (xx.14) then the LNWR Liverpool which leaves Rugby xx.18 is held. The Liverpool is effectively an all station stopper down the Cov corridor and has the xy.07 all station Wolves behind it at New St. If the Liverpool is late then it goes behind the Wolves local basically killing its path. This also then in turn hits the Virgin Anglo Scot behind it which leaves New St at xx.15. If the Virgin gets hit too much by around 10 minutes then once its as far away as Euxton it starts to get put behind the TPE to Scotland. It is down to a decision whether the Virgin going as far as Brum is a PPM failure or the Liverpool is. Not suggesting an answer, but the snowball effect is quite big.

And the reason the xx:23 from Euston is sometimes late can be due to the xx:20 to Manchester being even just a few minutes delayed between Euston and Watford Jct, and the xx:20 being delayed may be due to a delay on the previous LNWR service that runs fast line to Linslade. Really just goes to show how tight the timetable is on the WCML.

Camden · 5 Oct 2019

London Trains said:
And the reason the xx:23 from Euston is sometimes late can be due to the xx:20 to Manchester being even just a few minutes delayed between Euston and Watford Jct, and the xx:20 being delayed may be due to a delay on the previous LNWR service that runs fast line to Linslade. Really just goes to show how tight the timetable is on the WCML.

Maintaining that three trains an hour clockface high speed service to Manchester and Birmingham really impacts on capacity. Would be much better to drop to two trains an hour, and invest in train/platform lengthening if necessary

The Planner · 5 Oct 2019

Camden said:
Maintaining that three trains an hour clockface high speed service to Manchester and Birmingham really impacts on capacity. Would be much better to drop to two trains an hour, and invest in train/platform lengthening if necessary

Which is highly likely to happen after HS2, to provide the same level of capacity now then you are looking at 16 car trains and pretty much wholesale remodelling/signalling of a lot of stations but we have been here before..

West Midlands Trains London - Rugeley TV service to be split

On Moderation

RailUK Forums

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

On Moderation

Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Veteran Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member