Crewe to Derby line skeleton services.

[Coolguy22468]

I am a regular user of this line and over the past 7 years I have seen the line become a skeleton of its former self with the service cut back from Nottingham/Skegness to Manchester Airport to the Crewe to Derby that we see now as well as the removal of the class 170s to class 153s which are completely unsuitable. East Midlands trains often boasts that it has improved services around Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire but is it just me or have they in fact made these services worse.

 

[Eagle]

East Midlands trains often boasts that it has improved services around Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire...

Well your line goes through neither of those counties so... :P

 

[OuterDistant]

I'm probably going to sound like a broken old record on here but I saw the same (regular user 2004-2006; occasional thereafter). Moved away from near a station and feel lucky I don't have to use it any more - I can imagine it's a miserable experience now that the students are back!

The final insult was when EMT started charging for parking at the minor stations - none of them are near anything.

I see there's now a X50 bus service that parallels a lot of the journey as well - if anything, it's more appealing than a dogbox, despite it being an indirect journey.

 

[northwichcat]

The Crewe-Derby line has come up in Network Rail RUS' as requiring more suitable rolling stock. However, an earlier RUS described some Northern Rail routes with Pacers as having units unfit for purpose, which is correct but nothing's been done about it.

 

[Harbon 1]

I am a regular user of this line and over the past 7 years I have seen the line become a skeleton of its former self with the service cut back from Nottingham/Skegness to Manchester Airport to the Crewe to Derby that we see now as well as the removal of the class 170s to class 153s which are completely unsuitable. East Midlands trains often boasts that it has improved services around Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire but is it just me or have they in fact made these services worse.

I don't think the 153s are unsuitable. They seem to cope fine. Anyway, if you go on a Sunday, you get the added luxury of a 158

 

[185]

Should be given to London Midland for starters.

 

[MCR247]

Not really sure why? ECS moves from tylesley would be a bit pointless?

 

[A0]

Should be given to London Midland for starters.

I fail to see why - the only overlap is between Stoke & Crewe - which is the outer reach of LMs services.

I'd just about understand if you'd suggested it pass to Northern - but LM makes no sense at all.

I can't believe the traffic flows between Derby & Crewe are so great that for the majority of the time a 153 is insufficient.... Maybe at a couple of peak hours or race day at Uttoxeter, but not otherwise.

Maybe what's needed is an additional 153 and run it like LM run Bedford - Bletchley i.e. 1 x 1 car unit and 1 x 2 car unit - with the 2 car scheduled for the couple of very busy journeys.

 

[Coolguy22468]

Should be given to London Midland for starters.

I reckon that. London Midland would seem to be a better choice as 4 stops on the route are served by London Midland services but only Derby is served by other East Midlands Trains than the Crewe to Derby line.

The Class 153 trains are unsuitable because passengers at Longton, Blythe Bridge and Uttoxeter have near enough doubled but the amount of seats has more than halved.

 

[dk1]

Trains seem to be FAS whenever i use them made worse when racing at Uttoxeter although EMT do try to use 156s then. Always think its a pleasent route to use though.

 

[MCR247]

I reckon that. London Midland would seem to be a better choice as 4 stops on the route are served by London Midland services but only Derby is served by other East Midlands Trains than the Crewe to Derby line.

And? So you are suggesting that for this reason only we move from having trains based next door to one of the destinations, we go to ECS moves from Brum to Derby or Crewe?

Don't be ridiculous?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I'm probably going to sound like a broken old record on here but I saw the same (regular user 2004-2006; occasional thereafter). Moved away from near a station and feel lucky I don't have to use it any more - I can imagine it's a miserable experience now that the students are back!

The final insult was when EMT started charging for parking at the minor stations - none of them are near anything.

I see there's now a X50 bus service that parallels a lot of the journey as well - if anything, it's more appealing than a dogbox, despite it being an indirect journey.

On top of which it seems to be the first service cancelled when EMT has problems.
"nn07 Derby Cancelled" frequently comes up in red on Crewe live departures.

 

[Coolguy22468]

And? So you are suggesting that for this reason only we move from having trains based next door to one of the destinations, we go to ECS moves from Brum to Derby or Crewe?

Don't be ridiculous?

Fair Enough you have a point there I didn't think of that.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

On top of which it seems to be the first service cancelled when EMT has problems.
"nn07 Derby Cancelled" frequently comes up in red on Crewe live departures.

The worst problem is when one train is late going through Stoke-on-Trent as this has a knock on effect of all trains for the next 30-60 minuets.

 

[e3181]

have to agree 100% with you - although the service now only runs from crewe to derby its still an hour+ journey,a couple of years ago i had the misfortune to travel in the evening on a 153 from derby to kidsgrove and the one and only toilet on the train was out order - possibly not that unusual,
but after complaints to the guard on the journey and by email to emt after it was basically a case of sorry but beyond our control etc. seems its acceptable to run a journey of this length without toilet facilities as its on a bit of a backwater route - probably doesnt happen in the south east where an mp or whitehall mandarin might be using it!!

 

[Eagle]

...probably doesnt happen in the south east where an mp or whitehall mandarin might be using it!!

Nope. There are quite a lot of 1-hour or more services in the southeast that run with stock without toilets. 313s, 315s, 455s, 456s...

 

[Coolguy22468]

have to agree 100% with you - although the service now only runs from crewe to derby its still an hour+ journey,a couple of years ago i had the misfortune to travel in the evening on a 153 from derby to kidsgrove and the one and only toilet on the train was out order - possibly not that unusual,
but after complaints to the guard on the journey and by email to emt after it was basically a case of sorry but beyond our control etc. seems its acceptable to run a journey of this length without toilet facilities as its on a bit of a backwater route - probably doesnt happen in the south east where an mp or whitehall mandarin might be using it!!

Bit off topic but

Last week the London to Crewe train which was the replacement to the EMT service which was canceled because of flooding was delayed for something like 20 mins because the toilets were broken and they had to spend more time at Watford Junction so people could go so its not just small lines that have no toilet.

 

[sidmouth]

Used to travel Derby to Crewe quite often during the early 70s, when the service started / terminated Crewe / Derby. It then ran on an hourly frequency and took 1hr 20 minutes. So, I would say the service is no better / no worse (though I'd say a c153 is pure luxury compared to a 1st generation DMU).

 

[Coolguy22468]

Used to travel Derby to Crewe quite often during the early 70s, when the service started / terminated Crewe / Derby. It then ran on an hourly frequency and took 1hr 20 minutes. So, I would say the service is no better / no worse (though I'd say a c153 is pure luxury compared to a 1st generation DMU).

I wouldn't say that, the Class 153 trains get so overcrowded that they need 2 conductors even though it is just 1 carriage and East Midlands Trains admit they have to leave passengers behind.

 

[class222lover]

Nothing is really wrong with the EMT's class 153's on the crewe - derby route.
Yes they are old and a bit manky but they're still good working DMU's.

And anyway its only a short route.

Kind Regards, class222lover

 

[MCR247]

Nothing is really wrong with the EMT's class 153's on the crewe - derby route.
Yes they are old and a bit manky but they're still good working DMU's.

Like that was ever a problem? Overcrowding was the problem?

 

[class222lover]

Like that was ever a problem? Overcrowding was the problem?

I meant nothing being wrong with the class 153's capacity.

Kind Regards, class222lover

 

[tbtc]

A bigger issue (than occasional Uttoxeter race days) is the lack of longer distance services.

For operational reasons this line has lost its direct links to Manchester Airport, Nottingham etc, and is therefore relegated to a shuttle between Derby and Crewe, which means its downgraded to just 153s.

EMT are the logical operator for the service - neither Northern nor LM should use DMUs on overlapping routes (without getting into an argument about DMUs filling in for EMUs due to accidents etc), so it "fits" best with EMT.

 

[brianthegiant]

Yep, would be a lot better if it were linked up as a through service.

If I want to go eg Nottingham-Bangor this is generally the fastest route, even allowing for connection time at Derby, Crewe and Chester.. What a drag.

Is it just me or would Nottingham-Chester be a bigger pull than Nottingham-Matlock.
Not many people on the Nottingham-Matlock stay on at Derby anyway.

I've used it many times & the 153s often seem very crowded, by contrast the 2 car 158s etc on Lincoln-Leicester often seem half empty except at peaks (when they're still only 3/4 full).

 

[A0]

Nope. There are quite a lot of 1-hour or more services in the southeast that run with stock without toilets. 313s, 317s, 455s, 456s...

I think you mean 315s not 317s - the latter definitely have toilets.

 

[tom1649]

Is it just me or would Nottingham-Chester be a bigger pull than Nottingham-Matlock.
Not many people on the Nottingham-Matlock stay on at Derby anyway.

Unfortunately, this would probably mean Matlock would lose its hourly service. Usage of the line has increased dramatically since the frequency was increased. A Matlock - Derby hourly service would still need 2 units (each would have to spend a long time idle at Derby between runs) as opposed to the current 3 needed for the Matlock - Nottingham. This is my local line, so naturally I would be concerned about any proposed cut in the service.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Unfortunately, this would mean Matlock would lose its hourly service.

Surely it could just start from Derby and remain hourly?

 

[Coolguy22468]

Yep, would be a lot better if it were linked up as a through service.

If I want to go eg Nottingham-Bangor this is generally the fastest route, even allowing for connection time at Derby, Crewe and Chester.. What a drag.

Is it just me or would Nottingham-Chester be a bigger pull than Nottingham-Matlock.
Not many people on the Nottingham-Matlock stay on at Derby anyway.

I've used it many times & the 153s often seem very crowded, by contrast the 2 car 158s etc on Lincoln-Leicester often seem half empty except at peaks (when they're still only 3/4 full).

Nottingham to Chester would be a good choice or Nottingham to Manchester fast avoiding the ridiculously slow route through Sheffield.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Nottingham to Chester would be a good choice or Nottingham to Manchester fast avoiding the ridiculously slow route through Sheffield.

I'm going to guess here and say that I doubt it would be much faster than via Sheffield - certainly not is a long standing proposal is implemented and the Liverpool-Norwich trains miss out Sheffield by using the Dore South Curve.

 

[tom1649]

Surely it could just start from Derby and remain hourly?

It wouldn't be a productive use of 2 units. Journey is just over half an hour each way. (See my edited post above).

 

[Coolguy22468]

One of the things I also notice is that East Midlands Trains had posters all over the stations on the route claiming to be the best operating company when on closer inspection it then states for long distance trains which is a bit strange as the line is classed as local and not mainline.

Some trains like the 16:33 from Stoke-on-Trent towards Derby which is never on time and is regularly overcrowded and EMT openly admit they have to leave people behind like today when the had to turn away a bloke 2 trains in a row because he had a bike and there was no space and its a shame really that even today rail companies are having to leave people behind at station regularly.

Also I think a mistake by the government was to merge the Midland Mainline and local services into one franchise as the connect and local services are entirely different.