Has London Midland severed Rugby's chances of more Virgin calls?

[calc7]

Interested to know what you folks think of this one.

Shortly we will see the xx46 London Midland service from Euston run to Rugby via Weedon (and the same in reverse). Journey times won't be that much longer than the xx03 Virgin service.

Will Virgin/its successor abandon any plans it may have to call at Rugby? After all, the money is made on the EUS-RUG stretch - what is the point of calling at Rugby on say a Manchester service when the Off-Peak Return RUG-MAN is valid even in the peak and presumably Virgin get a rather low proportion. Even the RUG-EUS LM Only Anytime Return is reasonably price, never mind the Off-Peak and Super Off-Peak versions.

Could Rugby be stuck with only its VT Birmingham and LM Crewe trains?

I understand in the peak that Rugby sees a couple of extra calls

 

[Mutant Lemming]

It is basically a dormitory commuter town for Birmingham/Coventry and to a lesser extent London. The London Midland trains provide an adequate enough service. Why slow down longer distance trains ?

 

[calc7]

It is basically a dormitory commuter town for Birmingham/Coventry and to a lesser extent London. The London Midland trains provide an adequate enough service. Why slow down longer distance trains ?

Rugby acts as an InterCity railhead for significant parts of Warwickshire and Northamptonshire. But what is the quickest way to go from Rugby to Liverpool, Manchester or stations from Preston to Glasgow?

Compare this with journey times from Milton Keynes.

 

[The Planner]

Depends on how many stops at Rugby are in the franchise spec, they have to provide a certain level of service.

 

[calc7]

Depends on how many stops at Rugby are in the franchise spec, they have to provide a certain level of service.

They hit the current franchise spec by calling the xx03 Birminghams (xx50 BHM-EUS) trains at Rugby.

I can't see a more stringent clause being included.

I was open to the idea of "market forces" suggesting a natural extension of the ICWC stopping pattern at Rugby.

 

[jaigee]

The London Midland trains provide an adequate enough service. Why slow down longer distance trains ?

I see you live in London. :roll:

 

[All Line Rover]

Milton Keynes is where the money lies, not Rugby. It wouldn't have surprised me if, had First won the franchise and stopped many more trains at Milton Keynes (including in the peak, which was their plan), they'd cashed in by introducing 'First Only' season tickets around £1000/yr less than London Midland's 'Any Permitted' season tickets.

I think the issue with Rugby is not that not enough trains stop there, but that you can't double back via Milton Keynes. London Midland's faster services via Weedon will take just 20 minutes to travel between Rugby and Milton Keynes, so doubling back shouldn't be difficult. If Rugby gets fewer calls and Milton Keynes many more, the then West Coast franchise holder will have to introduce some sort of double-back easement (and not jack up the Off-Peak fares in the process!).

 

[radamfi]

Rugby can't really complain given that they will have 2 very fast trains to London per hour as well as connections along the Trent Valley and to Coventry, Birmingham and Northampton. For a relatively small population it is remarkably well served.

 

[D1009]

"The Money" lies in long distance business travel, not season tickets. The government has an objective of making more of the railway's funding to come from ticket sales. This is to either reduce the amount of taxpayer's money going into it, or to fill the TOCs' shareholders' pockets, depending on your point of view. So the answer to the OP's question is yes.

 

[All Line Rover]

"The Money" lies in long distance business travel, not season tickets. The government has an objective of making more of the railway's funding to come from ticket sales. This is to either reduce the amount of taxpayer's money going into it, or to fill the TOCs' shareholders' pockets, depending on your point of view. So the answer to the OP's question is yes.

Oh yes, that business travel market which has been steadily dwindling in size over the years, meaning some of Virgin's peak-time trains now have around 5 per First Class carriage (except in coach J, which is full of people on cheap First APs)?

As a long distance traveller I'm not a fan of having more trains stopping at Milton Keynes, but I accept that it's a captive market which ICWC would do well to tap into. Every peak(ish) train Virgin stops at Milton Keynes is packed out. The 18:43 is the best example of this - an 11-car Pendolino which is full to bursting on departure from Euston, yet by the time it reaches Birmingham (onward to Crewe), I'm often the only person left in a First Class carriage. The 20:10 to Chester is also full of Milton Keynes commuters.

 

[Geezertronic]

The 18:43 is the best example of this - an 11-car Pendolino which is full to bursting on departure from Euston, yet by the time it reaches Birmingham (onward to Crewe), I'm often the only person left in a First Class carriage. The 20:10 to Chester is also full of Milton Keynes commuters.

Last time I used the 1843 service, it was a 9 car 390 and it was packed out even then. I'd be lucky with a standing position by the doors before the MKC stop

 

[Mutant Lemming]

Rugby acts as an InterCity railhead for significant parts of Warwickshire and Northamptonshire. But what is the quickest way to go from Rugby to Liverpool, Manchester or stations from Preston to Glasgow?

Compare this with journey times from Milton Keynes.

Milton Keynes is also a railhead for parts of Northamptonshire and if you are going to pick a place to stop fast trains then a place with a population of 184'506 seems a more logical one than one with 61'988.


Rugby's main railway claim is more historical than practical these days. One 'mainline' train and two to three fast commuter trains an hour are more than adequate.

Even Nuneaton has a greater population than Rugby and would provide more cross country journey opportunities if fast trains called there.

 

[jaigee]

Even Nuneaton has a greater population than Rugby and would provide more cross country journey opportunities if fast trains called there.

Even more so with the introduction of the new LM 110mph services, as the convenient connection from the Stansteds northwards has now gone (and a similar situation at Stafford).

It's now either a 45min wait or carry on to Birmingham.

Both options extend the journey time considerably.

 

[gordonthemoron]

London Midland services would be a lot better if/when the Virgin Services which don't stop at Milton Keynes are diverted onto HS2. Currently there are no LM services on the Trent Valley to the north in the evening peak which means it is not possible to commute to MK from Nuneaton/Tamworth/Lichfield by rail

 

[cle]

"The Money" lies in long distance business travel, not season tickets. The government has an objective of making more of the railway's funding to come from ticket sales. This is to either reduce the amount of taxpayer's money going into it, or to fill the TOCs' shareholders' pockets, depending on your point of view. So the answer to the OP's question is yes.

Incorrect. The money lies in longer distance commuting, especially on intercity routes.

The most profitable route on the network is London - Reading, followed by London - Peterborough and London - Milton Keynes.

Other ones are rip-off fast train short distance honeypots like Sevenoaks and St Albans. And season tickets on these routes specifically.

 

[MK Tom]

It is a bit of a mystery to me why Nuneaton and Rugby didn't get the opposite deal in the VHF timetable. Nuneaton is a major junction, it is (as much as I like Rugby as a place) a larger, more important and more active town, and it has equal potential to serve as a railhead for rural Warwickshire and west Leicestershire. I suppose the simple difference is it isn't on the route to Birmingham. Perhaps if the West Coast franchise holder introduced a fourth EUS-BHM service it could run via MKC, Nuneaton and Coleshill. Don't know how much longer that would make the journey, not much I would expect, and it'd avoid more capacity issues between Coventry and New Street which everyone on here knows is a nightmare.

Getting back to the original point, LM after this change perhaps do give Rugby an adequate London service, but this is the same issue we were dealing with on the EUS-MKC overcrowding thread. Virgin services provide a much higher standard of service and it's completely understandable for Rugby residents to wonder why their town is slashed in two by high-quality services that completely fail to serve it. However going by the Rugby Rail Users website they seem more bothered about their lack of connections to the north, especially Manchester and Liverpool.

 

[jaigee]

It is a bit of a mystery to me why Nuneaton and Rugby didn't get the opposite deal in the VHF timetable. Nuneaton is a major junction, it is (as much as I like Rugby as a place) a larger, more important and more active town, and it has equal potential to serve as a railhead for rural Warwickshire and west Leicestershire.

At the time, the Rugby MP fought for it, the Nuneaton MP did not.

Perhaps if the West Coast franchise holder introduced a fourth EUS-BHM service it could run via MKC, Nuneaton and Coleshill. Don't know how much longer that would make the journey, not much I would expect, and it'd avoid more capacity issues between Coventry and New Street which everyone on here knows is a nightmare.

Nuneaton to Birmingham is not electrified.

 

[MK Tom]

At the time, the Rugby MP fought for it, the Nuneaton MP did not.



Nuneaton to Birmingham is not electrified.

I know that! I was assuming the use of a Voyager or two of them. Sorry I had assumed that was implicit.

 

[calc7]

I know that! I was assuming the use of a Voyager or two of them. Sorry I had assumed that was implicit.

IMO Voyagers should be used on non-electrified services, not giving NUN a token extra service!

Now if you extended that service to Shrewsbury...

 

[VideozVideoz]

It is basically a dormitory commuter town for Birmingham/Coventry and to a lesser extent London.

In my experience of getting trains to London in the morning peak, there has always been an excellent turn out at Rugby for commuting into London. I believe there are many commuters who live within good walking distance of the station so no parking charges apply.

 

[Ibex]

London Midland services would be a lot better if/when the Virgin Services which don't stop at Milton Keynes are diverted onto HS2. Currently there are no LM services on the Trent Valley to the north in the evening peak which means it is not possible to commute to MK from Nuneaton/Tamworth/Lichfield by rail

Not entirely true, from Monday there are LM Euston to Crewe services at 17:24, 18:29 and 20:13.

 

[whhistle]

Rugby can't really complain. For a relatively small population it is remarkably well served.

Ah ha, but this shouldn't be about the citizens of Rugby.

The station, being on the junction for the North West and Birmingham is massively underused as an interchange station. Virgin should look at stopping more trains to the north west and Scotland to take some pressure from Birmingham and other surrounding stations. Rugby has the physical platform space after all.

However Virgin and London Midland are too concerned with getting people from Milton Keynes to London. The locality of Milton Keynes to Rugby make them local stations to each other. Virgin need to remember they are not a local operator but one which takes people long distances. Something they fail to see at the moment.

Not looking at paths and such, the ideal solution would be for Virgin to provide a London - Milton Keynes shuttle service in the peak. I can't imagine many people would want to go from Lancaster to Milton Keynes, for example.

 

[NSEFAN]

Ah ha, but this shouldn't be about the citizens of Rugby.

The station, being on the junction for the North West and Birmingham is massively underused as an interchange station. Virgin should look at stopping more trains to the north west and Scotland to take some pressure from Birmingham and other surrounding stations. Rugby has the physical platform space after all.

However Virgin and London Midland are too concerned with getting people from Milton Keynes to London. The locality of Milton Keynes to Rugby make them local stations to each other. Virgin need to remember they are not a local operator but one which takes people long distances. Something they fail to see at the moment.

Not looking at paths and such, the ideal solution would be for Virgin to provide a London - Milton Keynes shuttle service in the peak. I can't imagine many people would want to go from Lancaster to Milton Keynes, for example.

The reason Virgin make quite a few calls at Milton Keynes is to try and get more revenue. This is called an ORCATS raid. It's basically an attempt to win over more ticket revenue from the fares allocation system. I suspect that Virgin don't have as many calls at Rugby because they don't feel it is as lucrative as the market in Milton Keynes.

If you want an integrated transport solution, then there would have to be some requirement from the government to make it happen. Otherwise, the TOCs will just do what is most profitable, which is not necessarily the best option for passengers or the overall network.

 

[jaigee]

In my experience of getting trains to London in the morning peak, there has always been an excellent turn out at Rugby for commuting into London. I believe there are many commuters who live within good walking distance of the station so no parking charges apply.

A good many of these people changed from the LM Crewe services for a faster service to London. From today these customers will disappear as the LM services are speeded up from Rugby, also, with the timetable alterations, the connection is not viable any more.

 

[Mr Spock]

A good many of these people changed from the LM Crewe services for a faster service to London. From today these customers will disappear as the LM services are speeded up from Rugby, also, with the timetable alterations, the connection is not viable any more.

During the "commuting" period the vast majority of passengers join the railway system from Rugby and not from the LM Trent Valley services. In this period Virgin stop trains at Tamworth, Nuneaton, etc so there is no need for these people to change at Rugby.

In the o0ff peak passengers did change at Rugby but they were very few compared to the numbers starting their journeys from Rugby.

 

[Cherry_Picker]

Ah ha, but this shouldn't be about the citizens of Rugby.

The station, being on the junction for the North West and Birmingham is massively underused as an interchange station. Virgin should look at stopping more trains to the north west and Scotland to take some pressure from Birmingham and other surrounding stations. Rugby has the physical platform space after all.

If you are using the "but it's a junction" argument, then surely Nuneaton is the place which should be used as the interchange? It has direct trains to Coventry and Birmingham like Rugby does but is also connected to Leicester and the East Midlands. Surely there are more cases of people who live on the southern end of the WCML needing to head into the East Midlands and people in the East Midlands wanting to go to Manchester and Scotland then there ever could be at Rugby? Coventry to Manchester while avoiding Wolverhampton (and therefore the direct trains they have at their station) is the main one I can think of, and they could do that at Nuneaton if they really wanted to.

 

[VideozVideoz]

A good many of these people changed from the LM Crewe services for a faster service to London. From today these customers will disappear as the LM services are speeded up from Rugby, also, with the timetable alterations, the connection is not viable any more.

LM have taken their old timetables offline now but by how much have the RUG-EUS LM trains been sped up by? From what I can see the Virgin service takes around 50mins and the LM service takes c. 1h 30mins. I wouldn't say that has been sped enough to rival Virgin's sub-1 hour journey time!

 

[dave_wm]

The new London Midland service takes 56 minutes, as opposed to 88 minutes, so very competitive bearing in mind how much cheaper the fares are!

 

[VideozVideoz]

The new London Midland service takes 56 minutes, as opposed to 88 minutes, so very competitive bearing in mind how much cheaper the fares are!

I just looked on their timetables and couldn't see any train taking 56 mins... we are looking at morning peak aren't we?

 

[MidnightFlyer]

The morning services ex-Crewe are:
RUG 0645 EUS 0811
RUG 0833 EUS 0937
RUG 0953 EUS 1049