Could the Class 397 be the perfect train for the Long-Distance London NorthWestern Railway services? (+my ideas for the future of LNWR)

[Energy]

This is true, and even from a fares perspective Avanti have always seemed fairly competitive (although I haven't looked recently in these challenging times).

Avanti are competitive if you book in advance, walk up fairs are meant to be pretty high. For some reason LNWR's website doesn't show Avanti advance fairs so I'm going of offpeak singles until I update this with fairs from Trainline, LNWR are £40, Avanti are £64.40, I think many people would pay the £24.40 to save 2 hours.

 

[Andy Pacer]

Avanti are competitive if you book in advance, walk up fairs are meant to be pretty high. For some reason LNWR's website doesn't show Avanti advance fairs so I'm going of offpeak singles until I update this with fairs from Trainline, LNWR are £40, Avanti are £64.40, I think many people would pay the £24.40 to save 2 hours.

I'm just going on personal experience.

 

[Energy]

I'm just going on personal experience.

To be fair walk up fairs are pretty high most TOCs.

 

[tetudo boy]

It has good acceleration but, again, the end doors will increase loading times

The reason why I had end doors in mind was that TPE replaced their Desiro's with end doors on an already busy route along the north WCML. What if LNWR did the same with their trains?

This thread seems to be trying to find a problem for a solution not a solution for a problem. Avanti are the long distance operator on the WCML, not LNWR. If more demand is needed on the long distance route to Liverpool then Avanti should be the ones with more services which is why they have planned an additional service to Liverpool.

Yes, I know, but I was trying to aim for LNWR to operate services that Avanti could not operate. It would be no use if Avanti made stops that are LNWR based like Smethwick Galton Bridge, Penkridge or Hartford as they are considered commuter stops.

 

[Purple Orange]

Until HS2 is open, I can’t imagine there will be much change on the WCML, therefore thoughts of this nature need to be post 2035 (or whenever HS2 is completed).

I can see end-door trains being confined to HS2 and NPR services, with the WCML seeing class 350 type operations between Birmingham, Liverpool & Manchester with frequent stops between them all. These services won’t cater for passengers travelling between Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester, but for passengers who travel between:

1. Wolverhampton, Stafford, Macclesfield & Crewe;
2. Macclesfield & Wilmslow to Manchester;
3. Stafford & Wolverhampton to Birmingham
4. Runcorn to Liverpool

And if those are the principal routes, I’d run such services as an all stop commuter service for each of those cities, it is just that 2 or 3 commuter services are joined to form a longer service spanning 90 miles.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If more demand is needed on the long distance route to Liverpool then Avanti should be the ones with more services which is why they have planned an additional service to Liverpool. LNWR take 3h52m direct London to Liverpool while Avanti take only 2h12m, I know which one most people will be taking...

You would be surprised just how many people do take the budget LNR option. It basically competes with your mate's old banger or the coaches, so grows the market in a way more Avanti services don't.

 

[Energy]

It basically competes with your mate's old banger or the coaches, so grows the market in a way more Avanti services don't.

But do LNWRs current services not take most of that demand?

 

[Bletchleyite]

But do LNWRs current services not take most of that demand?

Yes, though with an end to end journey time of over 4 hours it's a little bit constrained. If you shortened that a bit you'd get a lot more custom.

 

[Energy]

Yes, though with an end to end journey time of over 4 hours it's a little bit constrained. If you shortened that a bit you'd get a lot more custom.

The faster market is being taken care of by Avanti, LNWR services have found their demand and there is enough trains for this demand. Sure you could introduce services with less stops to Liverpool to compete with Avanti but to get close you will have to cut a lot of stops, increasing the price. It just isn't what LNWR run and I doubt the DfT would allow a LNWR service which rarely stopped and is more like an Avanti service.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The faster market is being taken care of by Avanti, LNWR services have found their demand and there is enough trains for this demand. Sure you could introduce services with less stops to Liverpool to compete with Avanti but to get close you will have to cut a lot of stops, increasing the price. It just isn't what LNWR run and I doubt the DfT would allow a LNWR service which rarely stopped and is more like an Avanti service.

But it is what LNR run - the Crewe service is very similar in timing to a classic pre-Pendolino WCML service (the very high acceleration of the Desiros compared to Mk3 LHCS makes up for the small number of extra stops). I'm talking about extending that service to one of the 3 key North West WCML destinations, and there absolutely would be a market for that.

There's a sweet spot for rail somewhere around 3 hours, and that would be delivered.

You could argue validly that the Crewe service should be moved over to Avanti. But to argue that it is in any way similar to the other LNR services (which are primarily local services that are strung together, not dissimilarly to Liverpool-Norwich, because you can grab the odd few extra passengers and it's operationally convenient[1]) would be to completely misunderstand what it is for.

If you were playing the German/Swiss game, every LNR service would be a RB or RE, except that one which would be an IR. It's fundamentally different from the others.

[1] Ish. In the new timetable a layover of about 20 minutes will be added at New St in both directions to solve the reliability problem. It will be interesting to see what this does to through passenger numbers.

 

[Energy]

But it is what LNR run - the Crewe service is very similar in timing to a classic pre-Pendolino WCML service (the very high acceleration of the Desiros compared to Mk3 LHCS makes up for the small number of extra stops). I'm talking about extending that service to one of the 3 key North West WCML destinations, and there absolutely would be a market for that.

There's a sweet spot for rail somewhere around 3 hours, and that would be delivered.

You could argue validly that the Crewe service should be moved over to Avanti. But to argue that it is in any way similar to the other LNR services (which are primarily local services that are strung together, not dissimilarly to Liverpool-Norwich, because you can grab the odd few extra passengers and it's operationally convenient[1]) would be to completely misunderstand what it is for.

If you were playing the German/Swiss game, every LNR service would be a RB or RE, except that one which would be an IR. It's fundamentally different from the others.

[1] Ish. In the new timetable a layover of about 20 minutes will be added at New St in both directions to solve the reliability problem. It will be interesting to see what this does to through passenger numbers.

It could be improved, currently the LNWR runs to Liverpool could cut some stops for the 3 hour mark, the 1tph to Birmingham can stay as is but introduce a 1tph to London with some stops removed, I doubt there is huge demand for Liverpool to say Hampton-in-Arden which wouldn't be fine by switching at New St.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It could be improved, currently the LNWR runs to Liverpool could cut some stops for the 3 hour mark, the 1tph to Birmingham can stay as is but introduce a 1tph to London with some stops removed, I doubt there is huge demand for Liverpool to say Hampton-in-Arden which wouldn't be fine by switching at New St.

You're again missing the point. The present services are local services which happen to carry some long distance traffic, and lopping stops from those would mean they didn't fulfil their primary purpose. The Crewe is a long distance semifast, so if you want a faster "slow Liverpool" that's the one to go for.

 

[Energy]

You're again missing the point. The present services are local services which happen to carry some long distance traffic, and lopping stops from those would mean they didn't fulfil their primary purpose. The Crewe is a long distance semifast, so if you want a faster "slow Liverpool" that's the one to go for.

That is why is left the the existing trains in as these local stations still have demand, I suggested a LNWR semifast for around the 3h run.

 

[TheWalrus]

So, 45 Class 730 units are being rolled out on LNWR mid/short-distance services, but what about long-distance services? Well... could the Class 397 be the next generation of trains on LNWR long-distance services to replace the class 350 that currently operate them?

What I was thinking of was ordering about 45 Class 397's to operate on long-distance services on LNWR. There are also a couple of unoriginal routes I have in mind that we will talk about later.

Here are the benefits of the Class 397 on LNWR services:

1. Extra Capacity: As you know, countless amounts of people use the West Coast Main Line every day. The maximum seating capacity of a class 350 unit is about 212-270, while the Class 397 is 286. You can see that there is more capacity for a Class 397 than a 350 unit. This will most likely ease congestion. However, it's not much of a change, so maybe some set's could have an extra sixth carriage?
2. Higher Speed: Class 350 unit's run at 110 mph, However, there has been the introduction of a train that can reach Pendolino speeds while not tilting, namely the class 397. These trains can still be comfortable as tilting trains on the WCML. If the Class 397 sets also ran services on LNWR services then their services would also benefit from this. This could cut off about 20% of the time. An active suspension system could also be added on the train to also tackle the curvy sections of the WCML and possibly improve their speed to 125 mph. This article explains more: https://medium.com/@garethdennis/is...ight-for-britains-tilting-trains-b6ebb496433c

I also have some new and extended routes in mind:

1. Extend the London Euston to Crewe via Trent Valley service to Liverpool calling at Crewe, Hartford, Runcorn, Liverpool South Parkway and Liverpool Lime Street.
2. Birmingham New Street to Preston (Blackpool North in the weekends and holidays) calling at Birmingham New Street, Smethwick Galton Bridge, Wolverhampton, Penkridge, Stafford, Crewe, Hartford, Warrington Bank Quay, Wigan North Western, Euxton Buckshaw Lane, Leyland, and Preston. (Weekend and Holiday Extention calling at Kirkham & Wesham, Poulton-le-Fylde and Blackpool North.).
3. Birmingham New Street to Manchester Piccadilly Via Macclesfield service calling at Birmingham New Street, Smethwick Galton Bridge, Wolverhampton, Penkridge, Stafford, Stone, Stoke-On-Trent, Kidsgrove, Macclesfield, Stockport and Manchester Piccadilly.
4. Birmingham New Street to Manchester Piccadilly Via Wilmslow service calling at Birmingham New Street, Smethwick Galton Bridge, Wolverhampton, Penkridge, Stafford, Crewe, Wilmslow, Stockport and Manchester Piccadilly.
5. Have a new London Euston to Birmingham New Street service calling at London Euston, Watford Junction, Milton Keynes Central, Northampton, Rugby, Coventry, Birmingham International and Birmingham New Street. The service would then continue onto other destinations north of Birmingham as usual.

Hopefully, the Class 397 can add some benefits to LNWR services in the future.

I actually think this is not a bad idea, and one of your better and more realistic ones! However it will come down to paths available at New Street, so for now we need to base any new ideas on the current amount of paths there.

The only way I can see Liverpool being connected to the South is by joining and splitting on XC services to/from Manchester, however I wouldn’t support this until XC have electric stock.

 

[tetudo boy]

That is why is left the the existing trains in as these local stations still have demand, I suggested a LNWR semifast for around the 3h run.

Um, the Class 397 can do London Euston - Liverpool via Tamworth in under 3 hours. That's if the speed increase is approved and active suspension is applied. Plus, the service doesn't go via Stoke-on-Trent anymore.

 

[tetudo boy]

I actually think this is not a bad idea, and one of your better and more realistic ones! However it will come down to paths available at New Street, so for now we need to base any new ideas on the current amount of paths there.

The only way I can see Liverpool being connected to the South is by joining and splitting on XC services to/from Manchester, however I wouldn’t support this until XC have electric stock.

Well... I could replace the XC services to Manchester. But that would cause confusion at Birmingham New Street. Maybe more XC services at Coventry to ease congestion?

 

[Energy]

Um, the Class 397 can do London Euston - Liverpool via Tamworth in under 3 hours. That's if the speed increase is approved and active suspension is applied. Plus, the service doesn't go via Stoke-on-Trent anymore.

Source? I doubt 15mph can make up 1 hour.

 

[tetudo boy]

Source? I doubt 15mph can make up 1 hour.

I didn't say that it would make up one hour, I said under 3 hours which is about between 3 hours and 2 hours and 45 minutes to do the whole route between London and Liverpool via Tamworth if you use the Class 397 with speed upgrades.

 

[Energy]

I didn't say that it would make up one hour, I said under 3 hours which is about between 3 hours and 2 hours and 45 minutes to do the whole route between London and Liverpool via Tamworth.

LNWR's website says 3h52m, to get under 3 hours your going to need cut away an hour (which is what I meant by make up) which I doubt you can do with only 15 mph.

 

[tetudo boy]

LNWR's website says 3h52m, to get under 3 hours your going to need cut away an hour (which is what I meant by make up) which I doubt you can do with only 15 mph.

I think you're talking about the service via Birmingham. The service via Birmingham is way longer.

 

[Bletchleyite]

LNWR's website says 3h52m, to get under 3 hours your going to need cut away an hour (which is what I meant by make up) which I doubt you can do with only 15 mph.

3h52 is via Birmingham. The Crewes are 2h 6m from Euston, so you'd be well under 3 hours if you added a Liverpool bit on even if it had to hang around at Crewe for a bit for a path.

The service via Birmingham is actually going to get slower - they are going to drop back a path at New St in both directions, which means a layover of between 20 and 30 minutes depending on which one. This is to solve the terrible punctuality problem that has been the case ever since the through services across Brum were introduced.

2h6 is very respectable indeed - I had no idea that they were now that quick. I wonder how much a 125mph unit would get off that?

 

[Energy]

I think you're talking about the service via Birmingham. The service via Birmingham is way longer.

Ahh, thats the one I'm talking about as that is the current service.

 

[tetudo boy]

Ahh, thats the one I'm talking about as that is the current service.

Yeah, we're not talking about that one, we're talking about the service via Tamworth and how it could improve with the class 397.

 

[tetudo boy]

So, Is the Class 397 still feasible from LNWR services? Are there any problems?

 

[JonathanH]

So, Is the Class 397 still feasible from LNWR services? Are there any problems?

Not feasible - they haven't ordered any.

 

[tetudo boy]

Not feasible - they haven't ordered any.

No, I mean feasible IF they were in service.

 

[37057]

So, Is the Class 397 still feasible from LNWR services? Are there any problems?

CAF!

 

[tetudo boy]

CAF!

Why? What about CAF? Would they have any strikes like what happened with their Northern/TPE fleet?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why? What about CAF?

Cheap As F***, i.e. a quality issue compared with well-screwed-together Siemens kit.

 

[tetudo boy]

Cheap As F***, i.e. a quality issue compared with well-screwed-together Siemens kit.

What quality issue?