Do WCML stations have a worse service under VTWC?

[B&I]

Because there are people who are paid far more than I and have far more experience than you, have already done the work on how to maximise the utilisation of the rail network in terms of getting most trains around it and carrying the most number of passengers.

What your suggesting wouldn't achieve a 'major modal shift' - quite the opposite. You're looking at dropping stops at places like MK where use is growing and will grow and substituting it with non-places like Nuneaton.

The bulk of journeys to / from Nuneaton aren't to London - they're to Birmingham, Leicester, Coventry, Wolverhampton, Stafford, possibly Derby and Nottingham. Running non-stop services to / from London will make precisely no difference to those journeys, nor will it persuade people who make those journeys by road to change how they travel.

Where did I propose reducing the current number of services to MK? I thought what I was proposing was an expansion of overall service levels (when you take into account the superfast trains on HS2 as well).

The reason I suggested Nuneaton would ne a useful calling point, particularly on a clearer, post-HS2 WCML - is precisely because of the local connections you suggest. That is why I began my mini-essay with the suggestion that the calling patterns should be based, in part, on connection opportunities. But I apologise for offending your deeply-cherished views about the relative merits of different towns in or around the Midlands.

On the wider point, if discussion of any change of the status quo upsets you so much, why do you post on a discussion forum about railway developments, rather than soending the dark evenings reading the current timetables?

 

[thenorthern]

One thing to remember is that pre December 2007 the Birmingham - North West - Scotland trains were operated by CrossCountry for about 4 weeks and prior to that Virgin Cross Country.

Have these services improved? Prior to 2007 the services ran from the South Coast / South West to Birmingham and then northwards, there were services from Penzance, Plymouth, Paignton, Bristol, Bournemouth and dare I say it Brighton and they went further north as some were extended to Dundee and Aberdeen. Also services from Stoke-on-Trent to destinations further north of Manchester. However at the same time the frequency was much worse than it is now and was often delayed.

 

[SeanM1997]

For me, additional calling points on the Trent Valley line major stations are needed. I would probably run two LWR services on the line:

1ph Crewe, Stafford, Rugeley TV, Lichfield TV, Tamworth, Atherstone, Nuneaton, Rugby, Milton Keynes Central and London Euston
1ph Crewe, Stafford, Rugeley TV, Lichfield TV, Tamworth, Polesworth (reopen second platform due to increasing passenger numbers), Atherstone, Nuneaton, Rugby, Long Buckby and Northampton - then maybe couple it with a Birmingham-Northampton-London service to continue to London Euston calling at Wolverton, Milton Keynes Central, Bletchley, Leighton Buzzard and London Euston

 

[pt_mad]

Where did I propose reducing the current number of services to MK? I thought what I was proposing was an expansion of overall service levels (when you take into account the superfast trains on HS2 as well).

The reason I suggested Nuneaton would ne a useful calling point, particularly on a clearer, post-HS2 WCML - is precisely because of the local connections you suggest. That is why I began my mini-essay with the suggestion that the calling patterns should be based, in part, on connection opportunities. But I apologise for offending your deeply-cherished views about the relative merits of different towns in or around the Midlands.

On the wider point, if discussion of any change of the status quo upsets you so much, why do you post on a discussion forum about railway developments, rather than soending the dark evenings reading the current timetables?

After HS2 phase 1, they'll probably want to stop two an hour at each of the main Trent Valley stations.

One thing to consider is that apparently First group as part of their unsuccessful bid for 2012 actually proposed far more calls in the Trent Valley. So perhaps the operator does have more clout in the calling pattern then we thought.

 

[Ianno87]

Well Nuneaton is actually 107 miles from London Euston for a start and I was comparing Nuneaton with Darlington slightly ironically in case no one got that. I believe that I am right in saying that south of Nuneaton, a 110mph train effectively takes up 2 x 125mph paths, hence the MAIN need for 125mph stock as using 110mph stock actually reduces overall line capacity. A 125mph service, first stop Nuneaton would free up capacity, then it can use the slows (which are in fact pretty fast) to call at Tamworth and Lichfield then probably Stafford and Crewe. The solution of using 110mph stock is simply a fudge of a solution, it doesn't make sense. If you then add a stopping service via Northampton you cover all the requirements.

Incorrect.

The way the WCML timetable is structured means that 110mph paths via Nuneaton do not in fact cost any additional capacity compared to a 125mph EPS paths.

This xx46 departure from Euston is followed out of Euston by the xx49 (110mph), calling on the Down Fast at Watford. It then runs Fast Line until diving off into Platform 5 at Milton Keynes, thence via Northampton. This itself fills up all the available standard hour capacity until the xx00 Pendolino departure (or xx57 in the peak when the xx49 omits Watford).

Meanwhile, the xx46 can continue its merry way on the Down Fast (calling MK and Rugby) and can get all the way to Rugby before being caught by a peak xx57, or Attleborough before being caught by an xx00. In either case diving onto the Slow out of the way.

Accelerating the 110mph path to reach Nuneaton sooner does not in itself create any additional usable Fast Line capacity, as the following xx49 still prevents any other departure before xx57 or xx00 anyway. Only if *everything* was 125mph and basically no stops were made on the Fast Lines would it make a difference.

An hourly, soon to be 8 car, service from Nuneaton to Euston in an hour and 10-15 minutes calling only at Rugby and MK is, frankly, excellent for a town like Nuneaton such a distance from London.

Look south of London and compare with the journey time to London from (say) Southampton or Portsmouth - both considerably more sizeable than Nuneaton and a similarish distance away

 

[6Gman]

It will be a Walsall to Crewe stopper then. Meaning Kidsgrove/Stoke will have hourly services to Walsall.[/QUOTE]




Kidsgrove to Walsall.

Not exactly Orient Express material is it?

 

[6Gman]

Incidentally, my view that something should stop at Nuneaton isn't primarily to cater for the residents of Nuneaton (splendid people though they may be) but to provide connections to "the Eastern Counties" as they were once termed. Chester - Peterborough; Runcorn - Ely; Liverpool - Leicester; and so on.

 

[Mathew S]

Incidentally, my view that something should stop at Nuneaton isn't primarily to cater for the residents of Nuneaton (splendid people though they may be) but to provide connections to "the Eastern Counties" as they were once termed. Chester - Peterborough; Runcorn - Ely; Liverpool - Leicester; and so on.

I hate to point this out, but surely there are connections to all of those services elsewhere on the WCML?

 

[B&I]

After HS2 phase 1, they'll probably want to stop two an hour at each of the main Trent Valley stations.

One thing to consider is that apparently First group as part of their unsuccessful bid for 2012 actually proposed far more calls in the Trent Valley. So perhaps the operator does have more clout in the calling pattern then we thought.

Or maybe that's an indication that VTWC will run the absolute bare minimum service unless someone forces them to do otherwise.

 

[B&I]

I hate to point this out, but surely there are connections to all of those services elsewhere on the WCML?

In many cases, surely this can only be done by a longer journey to New St (and a more awkward change there at a much more crowded station), or a very long and slow detour via Derby or Sheffield? (Written from platform 7 at Nuneaton, on way from Liverpool to Leicester.)

 

[Mathew S]

In many cases, surely this can only be done by a longer journey to New St (and a more awkward change there at a much more crowded station), or a very long and slow detour via Derby or Sheffield? (Written from platform 7 at Nuneaton, on way from Liverpool to Leicester.)

Yes, you have to change at New St if you want to go via the WCML, but most of those routes can be accessed by other routes (eg. East Midlands or TPE to Sheffield, VTEC to Peterborough). Not every journey has to go via the WCML.

If you are going to insist on a connection from the WCML, I'd be changing at Liverpool/Runcorn, Chester, or Manchester for a lot of the destinations you suggested, depending on my starting point.

 

[6Gman]

I hate to point this out, but surely there are connections to all of those services elsewhere on the WCML?

Not as conveniently however.

 

[Mathew S]

Not as conveniently however.

Which will always be the case. My point, which was parenthetical at best, is that making connections to east-west services, connections which can already be made elsewhere, isn't enough of a reason to delay long distance fast services by adding an extra stop. This is all the more so when many journeys to the destinations concerned would be better made by alternative routes altogether.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Incidentally, my view that something should stop at Nuneaton isn't primarily to cater for the residents of Nuneaton (splendid people though they may be) but to provide connections to "the Eastern Counties" as they were once termed. Chester - Peterborough; Runcorn - Ely; Liverpool - Leicester; and so on.

There are other alternatives to those, though, primarily involving the Liverpool to Norwich service and the MML.

 

[B&I]

Yes, you have to change at New St if you want to go via the WCML, but most of those routes can be accessed by other routes (eg. East Midlands or TPE to Sheffield, VTEC to Peterborough). Not every journey has to go via the WCML.

If you are going to insist on a connection from the WCML, I'd be changing at Liverpool/Runcorn, Chester, or Manchester for a lot of the destinations you suggested, depending on my starting point.

I had in mind coming from around Liverpool or Manchester, or really anywhere on the WCML north of about Crewe. To get to (for example) Leicester (picked purely at random as that's where I type this from), you can either chunter round to Sheffield and change again there, which takes forever, or at a few select times of the day change easily at Nuneaton for a quick hop on a local train. You don't have to use the WCML, but doing so can make things easier.

 

[Mathew S]

I had in mind coming from around Liverpool or Manchester, or really anywhere on the WCML north of about Crewe. To get to (for example) Leicester (picked purely at random as that's where I type this from), you can either chunter round to Sheffield and change again there, which takes forever, or at a few select times of the day change easily at Nuneaton for a quick hop on a local train. You don't have to use the WCML, but doing so can make things easier.

I agree it's not a consistent journey. A quick check of NRE gives options changing at Sheffield, New St, Wolverhampton, and, yes, Nuneaton. Of all those, personally I'd be going via Sheffield or New St, just because those seem the simplest options to me.
The current state of servives from Liverpool, and of East-West rail, have been done to death elsewhere but the solution to neither of these problems is to add WCML stops at Nuneaton. That's if you even think there's a problem which needs solving in the first place.

 

[158756]

I agree it's not a consistent journey. A quick check of NRE gives options changing at Sheffield, New St, Wolverhampton, and, yes, Nuneaton. Of all those, personally I'd be going via Sheffield or New St, just because those seem the simplest options to me.
The current state of servives from Liverpool, and of East-West rail, have been done to death elsewhere but the solution to neither of these problems is to add WCML stops at Nuneaton. That's if you even think there's a problem which needs solving in the first place.

It looks to me as if Liverpool-XC stations via Leicester is already quickest via Nuneaton, also changing at Stafford. Hypothetically if you could stop the Liverpool-Euston service in it's current path that would save 30 minutes to Leicester, but nothing beyond because of the connections.

What I don't get though is that we're having this discussion of how terrible it would be if a Pendolino stopped at Nuneaton, but they stop not that far away at the smaller town of Stafford, where as far as I can tell they make no connections not offered by other services, because they follow the Liverpool-Birmingham trains in both directions.

 

[The Planner]

It isn't just that though, look at the catchment areas for people likely driving to the stations.

 

[nuneatonmark]

Where to start with this preposterous & deluded nonsense?

On what basis is Nuneaton such an important place? It is a small, insignificant place with very little going for it other than cheaper housing than further south. It has little to attract inward commuting and these days exists to offer housing to people working in the bigger towns and cities locally. Those flows are already well catered for. Birmingham is 30 minutes away. Surely this is the main commuter route for the town but you will, of course, claim otherwise but anyone. London is 1hr 15 minutes away with a stop at what is becoming an important location for residents of Nuneaton: Milton Keynes.

You constantly whine on about some latent untapped demand for Virgin trains to serve Nuneaton however your entire argument seems to be that because other towns have them you must have them! WHY must Nuneaton have services at the expense of outer towns ( mainly Milton Keynes and Rugby?) Personally i think your whole argument is that you are too good to travel on a mere EMU.....................

In honesty the reason "they" are going to 8 carriages on the TV run is to serve Milton Keynes and Euston. People travel in good numbers from Rugby, Nuneaton, Tamworth to Milton Keynes. There are some who travel on to London but the bow wave of London commuting is at Rugby. It may be creeping up to Nuneaton but only because the houses are cheaper. There is also good travel between the TV stations.

BTW - I am not sure you understand geography but Darlington is 2hrs 30 mins from Kings Cross. Darlington serves a much wider area than Nuneaton. Darlington serves Teesside, North Yorkshire ( including Catterick Garrison - the largest UK army base) and County Durham.



Why would you bypass a major reveune point in Milton Keynes to offer people of Nuneaton a direct service to London on an hourly basis? Which towns will you deprive of services to fit in your almost pointless calls at Nuneaton outside of peak hours? Perhaps you could list them here with your reasoning?

I would be prepared to consider more peak hours Virgin calls at Nuneaton if the demand really existed and the impact on more major flows could be minimised.



Was there an hourly 9 car train calling at Nuneaton before the VHF timetable Virgin created? If the market was a s strong as is suggested by other posters then the trains would not have been cut, surely? I suggest the market wasn't there.

However, the issue with the LM services is not, really, Nuneaton. It is travel to and from MK and the cheap tickets offered by LM on Euston to MK/Stoke/Stafford/Crewe runs coupled with an increase in travel between the TV stations because of a much better and more frequent service.

Well at least try to quote me properly. Just about everything you say I have said I have never said! Let me take one point at a time

Birmingham is not the main commuter flow from Nuneaton - never ever said that it wasn't the main commuter flow, this topic isn't about the cross country service, which is inadequate
WHY must Nuneaton have services at the expense of outer towns ( mainly Milton Keynes and Rugby?) - never, ever said that either in fact I have supported extra services for both as both were affected badly by the VHF timetable
Why would you bypass a major reveune point in Milton Keynes to offer people of Nuneaton a direct service to London on an hourly basis? Which towns will you deprive of services to fit in your almost pointless calls at Nuneaton outside of peak hours? Perhaps you could list them here with your reasoning? - Never ever said that either, all I have said is a better use of the available paths is to run an extra (or two) 125mph service instead of one current 110mph service, one which could run fast to Nuneaton or MK then Nuneaton, then serve the principle TV stations, then on to Liveprool or somewhere else. Or could stop the current Chester services at Nuneaton instead.

In the interest of balance though a couple of areas we do agree on
I would be prepared to consider more peak hours Virgin calls at Nuneaton if the demand really existed and the impact on more major flows could be minimised. Agreed, and to be fair we've had some peak time trains added in the evening which has helped the already strong growth in usage from Nuneaton over the last few years.
Milton Keynes, yes it has become more important but I am not suggesting bypassing it just serving it in a different way and London will always be many times more important.

As other posters said we did have an hourly London - Liverpool service stop at Nuneaton plus a few extras before VHF and there were signs even then that after all the disruption along the west coast were service were routinely diverted away from the Trent Valley that use was recovering strongly. Some good points made about connections at Nuneaton, some 600000 interchanges were made at Nuneaton, not insignificant at all. Also, on this pathing issue, given that I sat down with someone from the DfT at the time of the 110 project and look at how the pathing worked I'd be surprised he got that wrong, he clearly said you can run 2 125pmh paths where one 110mph path exists, south of Nuneaton, we even went into how many seconds per mile a 125mph train would catch a 110mph train going through Weedon! I'd be surprised if he got that wrong.

 

[whhistle]

I hate to point this out, but surely there are connections to all of those services elsewhere on the WCML?

Feel free to point any out.
Your leading suggestion of getting everyone to change at New St simply adds to a hugely busy station already. I've known people to make their journey longer NOT to change at New St.

My point is that making connections to east-west services, connections which can already be made elsewhere, isn't enough of a reason to delay long distance fast services by adding an extra stop.

You should have just said that instead of shrouding it in some other wording.
The question REALLY is how many minutes would be lost stopping at Nuneaton. If it only loses, say less than 5 minutes by the time it gets to the next station on the list, I'd say that's worth it. Or worth a try to see how many customers use that connection at least!

 

[pt_mad]

Well at least try to quote me properly. Just about everything you say I have said I have never said! Let me take one point at a time

Birmingham is not the main commuter flow from Nuneaton - never ever said that it wasn't the main commuter flow, this topic isn't about the cross country service, which is inadequate
WHY must Nuneaton have services at the expense of outer towns ( mainly Milton Keynes and Rugby?) - never, ever said that either in fact I have supported extra services for both as both were affected badly by the VHF timetable
Why would you bypass a major reveune point in Milton Keynes to offer people of Nuneaton a direct service to London on an hourly basis? Which towns will you deprive of services to fit in your almost pointless calls at Nuneaton outside of peak hours? Perhaps you could list them here with your reasoning? - Never ever said that either, all I have said is a better use of the available paths is to run an extra (or two) 125mph service instead of one current 110mph service, one which could run fast to Nuneaton or MK then Nuneaton, then serve the principle TV stations, then on to Liveprool or somewhere else. Or could stop the current Chester services at Nuneaton instead.

In the interest of balance though a couple of areas we do agree on
I would be prepared to consider more peak hours Virgin calls at Nuneaton if the demand really existed and the impact on more major flows could be minimised. Agreed, and to be fair we've had some peak time trains added in the evening which has helped the already strong growth in usage from Nuneaton over the last few years.
Milton Keynes, yes it has become more important but I am not suggesting bypassing it just serving it in a different way and London will always be many times more important.

As other posters said we did have an hourly London - Liverpool service stop at Nuneaton plus a few extras before VHF and there were signs even then that after all the disruption along the west coast were service were routinely diverted away from the Trent Valley that use was recovering strongly. Some good points made about connections at Nuneaton, some 600000 interchanges were made at Nuneaton, not insignificant at all. Also, on this pathing issue, given that I sat down with someone from the DfT at the time of the 110 project and look at how the pathing worked I'd be surprised he got that wrong, he clearly said you can run 2 125pmh paths where one 110mph path exists, south of Nuneaton, we even went into how many seconds per mile a 125mph train would catch a 110mph train going through Weedon! I'd be surprised if he got that wrong.

Since Norton Bridge upgrade there should now, in theory, be an extra two fast paths each off-peak hour available from London Euston. Before Norton Bridge flyover was completed, it was being speculated that one of them might well end up being used as a second Liverpool. However, nothing has come of it.
So I understand your point about 110mph trains potentially holding up a following express, but there are spare paths available now anyway so in theory if the DFT or the operator had any desire to run another express each hour they could do.

Having enough tilting trains to do so is another problem. No more new ones on the horizon and with HS2 coming, none likely to be manufactured.

So it's a case of 110mph is the next best available option for the off peak. Once the long trains are in operation on the Desiro service it should be pretty good for the TV. A big improvement on what the Trent Valley stations have had in recent years. And the units do accelerate well. And connectivity is good.

So yes sympathising that in recent years the Trent Valley services could have been far better, it seem it's onwards and upwards for the Trent Valley now. An hourly 8 or poss 12 car 21st century built train with free wifi, a smooth ride and good acceleration.
Compare this to if the West Coast operator was still running MK3 coaches. It'd be 110mph with one maybe two stops from Nuneaton. Poor acceleration and a not too dissimilar journey time. So things are improving and back up to standards of pre 2004.

Yes some odd additional VT services probably would be justified at Nuneaton. Perhaps something departing Euston around 1600 going North. And most certainly on Saturdays. Looking at RTT it appears Nuneaton has only 5 VT services on a Saturday all together Vs 14 daily during the week. Lichfield has a better Saturday service. And it may well be down to their very proactive rail group which can be found online. Seems to have local political interest in their rail group as well judging by the minutes posted online.

Perhaps a Liverpool service could be justified at Nuneaton on a Saturday morning, for day trippers. And a return stop in the evening. And probably another Saturday morning Euston service on top of only two they have now.


One thing worth adding, is that from December the Euston to Crewe desiro service will go main line from Stafford to Crewe. Now with the journey improvements this could provide travelling from the East to Northern England, Scotland, and North Wales via Nuneaton, it may well be that online journey planners start to offer this more frequently. And this will build the footfall in itself for Nuneaton. And if the numbers increased significantly, it may well be that VT could look at stopping more trains there to pick up some of the slack. Especially if tickets were regular anytime or off peak non operator specific tickets which I imagine most would be.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Kidsgrove to Walsall.

Not exactly Orient Express material is it?

I'd watch the film "Murder on the Kidsgrove-Walsall Express"

To be fair, it isn't going to Walsall (despite the obvious cinematic potential) it takes the Wolverhampton-Walsall stopper path between Wolverhampton and Birmingham, then carries on to Euston. What happens to the Walsall train, I am afraid Poirot will have to solve.

 

[SeanM1997]

I believe the Crewe-Stoke-Birmingham will replace 1ph Wolverhampton-Walsall stopping service. There will be additional trains to Walsall from Birmingham though, where a change could be quicker to reach Wolverhampton. Also the second Wolverhampton-Walsall service in unaffected

 

[DenmarkRail]

I kind of rest my point now, as I realise if I avdocate more Stafford trains, I'll have to accept the STA to EUS trains stopping at other places, which is NO NO NO for me

 

[The Planner]

Also, on this pathing issue, given that I sat down with someone from the DfT at the time of the 110 project and look at how the pathing worked I'd be surprised he got that wrong, he clearly said you can run 2 125pmh paths where one 110mph path exists, south of Nuneaton, we even went into how many seconds per mile a 125mph train would catch a 110mph train going through Weedon! I'd be surprised if he got that wrong.

I won't comment on DfT getting things wrong but if you are comparing non stop paths then, yes, you would get 2 125mph paths against a 110mph over the sort of distance you are talking about. Whether that is the best use of capacity is a different question.

 

[DarloRich]

Whether that is the best use of capacity is a different question.

and there is the nub of the whole argument!

 

[pt_mad]

Regarding 'do west coast stations have a worse service under VTWC', what do people envisage will be the sort of West Coast operator calling pattern (particularly the southern end and the Trent Valley) once HS2 phase one is open?

Would imagine with 50 odd tilting trains available and only the WCML on which to run them, more of the intermediate stations would have a very regular express service.

 

[Mathew S]

Regarding 'do west coast stations have a worse service under VTWC', what do people envisage will be the sort of West Coast operator calling pattern (particularly the southern end and the Trent Valley) once HS2 phase one is open?

Would imagine with 50 odd tilting trains available and only the WCML on which to run them, more of the intermediate stations would have a very regular express service.

I agree, though if it stops at that many stations I'm not sure it counts as an 'express' anymore.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I believe the Crewe-Stoke-Birmingham will replace 1ph Wolverhampton-Walsall stopping service. There will be additional trains to Walsall from Birmingham though, where a change could be quicker to reach Wolverhampton. Also the second Wolverhampton-Walsall service in unaffected

I expect the Walsall services will change when Walsall-Rugeley goes electric.
But Crewe-Stoke-Wolverhampton-Birmingham-Walsall-Rugeley would certainly be "round the houses".
"Cannock Express" maybe?

 

[jfollows]

Regarding 'do west coast stations have a worse service under VTWC', what do people envisage will be the sort of West Coast operator calling pattern (particularly the southern end and the Trent Valley) once HS2 phase one is open?

It's all about HS2, isn't it?
Prior to VTWC, and in its early days when we were being told how dreadful the trains "inherited" from BR were, I used to travel from Manchester to London frequently and my train of choice ran non-stop from Wilmslow to Watford Junction, and sometimes changed there for Kensington Olympia which was useful.
In the first incarnation of the Pendolino service I had moved to Wilmslow and went Wilmslow-Crewe-Nuneaton-Leicester with ease.
In the current incarnation I have done Wilmslow-Crewe-Nuneaton-Coventry but this was for the novelty (at the time) of the new LM service from Crewe, it was tediously slow of course.
Post HS2 I want to be able to use the WCML to get from Wilmslow to Leicester, Northampton and Coventry in less time than it takes to get to London, which isn't the case today, and I expect to see a limited stop service south of Crewe which delivers this.
I'd LIKE to see a more comfortable Wilmslow-London service with better food which uses nice rolling stock as an alternative to the HS2 service, but that's probably a dream.
For speed I can drive to HS2 if I'm still capable of driving by the time it opens. But the real thing HS2 delivers to me and to many are significantly better options for journeys which aren't to London.