CT Timetable changes

Status
Not open for further replies.

steve158

Member
Joined
29 Jun 2005
Messages
166
Location
Lincolnshire
in the new timetable:

nottm-mansfield woodhouse services will be withdrawn offpeak.

the current crewe-skegness service will split at derby, and form crewe-derby and nottm-skegness services. i would think the stations between derby and nottm would be served by hereford/cardiff trains.

nottm-skeg trains which had request stops(i.e.hubberts bridge, swineshead)will now call at stations automatically.

simplification of lincoln area services - probably cutting them :( :(

various changes in the W Midlands which i can't remember now...
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Nick

Member
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
976
Hmmm, thanks Steve for posting these.

Nottingham-Mansfield off peak I suspect is being killed by the tram, line capacity issues and just a lack of users! It never really seems busy at all, not sure I'd enjoy being a conductor on it....but some WM routes are worse. Indeed going back to the RHL, I remember seeing a 170/6 working an off-peak working to Mansfield Woodhouse less that 1/12 full! Poor use of logistics IMHO.

Crewe-Skegness would work well as a hourly through route for most of the day, but I can see the issues of getting the stock from Eastcroft ECS each morning to the termini, indeed isn't it odd that the trains to form the new services will run ECS Nottingham-Derby when they could quite easily run in service for the commuters!

Request stops now compulsery stops....even if no-ones there, great!
 
Joined
11 Jul 2005
Messages
194
Nick said:
Hmmm, thanks Steve for posting these.

Nottingham-Mansfield off peak I suspect is being killed by the tram, line capacity issues and just a lack of users! It never really seems busy at all, not sure I'd enjoy being a conductor on it....but some WM routes are worse. Indeed going back to the RHL, I remember seeing a 170/6 working an off-peak working to Mansfield Woodhouse less that 1/12 full! Poor use of logistics IMHO.

Crewe-Skegness would work well as a hourly through route for most of the day, but I can see the issues of getting the stock from Eastcroft ECS each morning to the termini, indeed isn't it odd that the trains to form the new services will run ECS Nottingham-Derby when they could quite easily run in service for the commuters!




Request stops now compulsery stops....even if no-ones there, great!

Two of the early Derby - Crewe trains are formed from stock coming from Birmingham if I remember correctly. Getting from Eastcroft to Derby will not be a problem as they will probably not go ECS perhaps joined to an exsisting service.


hopefully, im begging they will give us a later train from derby, 22.35 will do nice :)
 

steve158

Member
Joined
29 Jun 2005
Messages
166
Location
Lincolnshire
Nick said:
Hmmm, thanks Steve for posting these.

Nottingham-Mansfield off peak I suspect is being killed by the tram, line capacity issues and just a lack of users! It never really seems busy at all, not sure I'd enjoy being a conductor on it....but some WM routes are worse. Indeed going back to the RHL, I remember seeing a 170/6 working an off-peak working to Mansfield Woodhouse less that 1/12 full! Poor use of logistics IMHO.

Crewe-Skegness would work well as a hourly through route for most of the day, but I can see the issues of getting the stock from Eastcroft ECS each morning to the termini, indeed isn't it odd that the trains to form the new services will run ECS Nottingham-Derby when they could quite easily run in service for the commuters!

Request stops now compulsery stops....even if no-ones there, great!

it's only really busy during the peak, for example the 1656 and 1726 from Nottingham are rammed most weekdays, and the last one of the day(2106), is normally a 2 car unit and its dead!

however i think a lot of these changes are down to a shortage of units and preperation for the big carve up(derby-crewe for example).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top