Hypothetical: Post-HS2 WCML Timetable

[Metrolink]

I have just been reading the most recent issue of Modern Railways and was intrigued by the HS2 coverage that was part of it. I was in particularly interested by the timetable section. This led me to think about the services on the existing 18 platforms at Euston and how they could be utilised for services similar to the WMT services in place. Scrapping all existing services and using a whole new timetable what would your ideal timetable be? This can also include services focused on the North West, such as Crewe - Manchester and other routes that will lose their fast services. I would say their is capacity at Euston for minimal 20tph possibly even 30tph.

My ideal service pattern would look like this:

Euston Services:

4tph Northampton - Euston ( 2tph Slow; 2tph calling at Watford Junction, Bletchley and Milton Keynes Central only.

3tph Wolverhampton - Birmingham NS - Euston (2tph all stops south of Rugby, calling at B’ham Intl and Coventry additionally; 1 tph calling at Birmingham International, Coventry, and MK)

3tp2h Crewe - Euston via Stoke-On-Trent (calling at all stops to Watford Junction, bar Polesworth)

1tph Rugeley Trent Valley - Euston Stopper

4tph Tring - Euston Stopper

Possibilities:

1tph St Albans Abbey - Euston

Grand Central for Blackpool North/ Preston/ Wigan - Euston?

No Involvement with Euston:

1tph Manchester - Bristol (calling at Crewe, Stafford and Birmingham NS,
Cheltenham Spa and Bristol Parkway)


2tph Birmingham - Liverpool Stopper

1tph Coventry - Manchester (coordinating with the XC to Bournemouth)

1tph MK- Manchester fast via Crewe

If I could make the decision electrification of North Wales Line because tbf that’s really missing out on HS2.

Any alterations or additions? And your own thoughts?

EDIT: My 100th Message!

 

[JonathanH]

My ideal service pattern would look like this:

Ideal because it suits travel patterns or because it looks good on a piece of paper?

services on the existing 18 platforms at Euston

There aren't 18 platforms any more.

Possibilities:

1tph St Albans Abbey - Euston

Not sure how HS2 helps this one. Not really possible either or a good use of track capacity.

Grand Central for Blackpool North/ Preston/ Wigan - Euston?

Why?

3tp2h Crewe - Euston via Stoke-On-Trent (calling at all stops to Watford Junction, bar Polesworth)

1tph Rugeley Trent Valley - Euston Stopper

Not convinced by either of these ideas. Why 3tp2h? What runs in the gap? Why is the Crewe service so slow?

 

[CarrotPie]

Grand Central for Blackpool North/ Preston/ Wigan - Euston?

They abandoned that months ago.

 

[Metrolink]

Ideal because it suits travel patterns or because it looks good on a piece of paper?

Travel Patterns. This is based on some of the existing services but I have altered them.

Why?

Because Post - HS2 Wigan will get 1tph to London and Blackpool zero.
I am also aware they abandoned this plan but could be used as a summer service or 2/3tpd.

 

[CarrotPie]

3tp2h Crewe - Euston via Stoke-On-Trent (calling at all stops to Watford Junction, bar Polesworth)

What's wrong with Polesworth? Without reinstating the bridge, you can still have more than 6 trains a week stop there, surely, if even only in the northbound direction?

 

[JonathanH]

4tph Northampton - Euston ( 2tph Slow; 2tph calling at Watford Junction, Bletchley and Milton Keynes Central only.

What about Leighton Buzzard's claims to a fast service?

 

[Metrolink]

What's wrong with Polesworth? Without reinstating the bridge, you can still have more than 6 trains a week stop there, surely, if even only in the northbound direction?

Nothing, but the data shows that the station is barely used not just because of the decrease in service but the service was reduced on purpose, because it was unnecessary. Furthermore it can only be served in a northbound direction and it would be stupid to reinstate the southbound to serve little demand for a small town. I would also mention that there is probably more demand for trains to London than trains to Lichfield or Crewe

What about Leighton Buzzard's claims to a fast service?

I’m sure Leighton Buzzard could get a fast service if the demand was there.

 

[Purple Orange]

I do like a speculative thread about post HS2. There is a mistake about focussing on Euston, however HS2 is an opportunity to recast the service pattern for our 3 largest cities & Leeds.

There is often a mistake of assuming that much of the existing services will continue, particularly XC services. Those services will a huge fall in passenger numbers unless they change their offering.

As a principal, I’d like to see a move towards a London
Northwestern style operation between all three major cities for all non-HS2 services.

 

[JonathanH]

I’m sure Leighton Buzzard could get a fast service if the demand was there.

Yes, but it isn't in your 'ideal' plan.

 

[Purple Orange]

Does anyone have a link to the latest view on post HS2 services?

 

[JonathanH]

Does anyone have a link to the latest view on post HS2 services?

It is in the economic case for HS2 and summarised here.

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/what-to-do-with-lnwr-london-birmingham-services-post-hs2.214160/page-2#post-4996310

 

[Purple Orange]

It is in the economic case for HS2 and summarised here.

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/what-to-do-with-lnwr-london-birmingham-services-post-hs2.214160/page-2#post-4996310

Ah is that not a post phase 2a scenario, rather than a post phase 2b?

 

[swt_passenger]

Does anyone have a link to the latest view on post HS2 services?

Do you mean the latest official view?

Or the latest forum member speculation. Difficult to keep up with the latter, as there’s a new thread so often...

 

[Purple Orange]

Do you mean the latest official view?

Or the latest forum member speculation. Difficult to keep up with the latter, as there’s a new thread so often...

Latest official view, rather than internet speculation.

 

[CarrotPie]

Nothing, but the data shows that the station is barely used not just because of the decrease in service but the service was reduced on purpose, because it was unnecessary. Furthermore it can only be served in a northbound direction and it would be stupid to reinstate the southbound to serve little demand for a small town. I would also mention that there is probably more demand for trains to London than trains to Lichfield or Crewe


I’m sure Leighton Buzzard could get a fast service if the demand was there.

Build it and they will come!

 

[JonathanH]

Build it and they will come!

Get the timetable wrong and they won't come.

 

[NoRoute]

My ideal service pattern would look like this:

Euston Services:

4tph Northampton - Euston ( 2tph Slow; 2tph calling at Watford Junction, Bletchley and Milton Keynes Central only.

3tph Wolverhampton - Birmingham NS - Euston (2tph all stops south of Rugby, calling at B’ham Intl and Coventry additionally; 1 tph calling at Birmingham International, Coventry, and MK)

3tp2h Crewe - Euston via Stoke-On-Trent (calling at all stops to Watford Junction, bar Polesworth)

1tph Rugeley Trent Valley - Euston Stopper

Apart from the Northampton service, which obviously stops there, how many of these would go via Northampton, calling there and at Long Buckby?

As all of the long distance, intercity services move on HS2 then what services would use the fast lines which avoid Northampton?

 

[Purple Orange]

Apart from the Northampton service, which obviously stops there, how many of these would go via Northampton, calling there and at Long Buckby?

As all of the long distance, intercity services move on HS2 then what services would use the fast lines which avoid Northampton?

Chester & North Wales perhaps? I also think there is a case for combining Manchester, Birmingham, London services as a semi-fast operation. There will be no need for the Avanti type services we have today, but there will be demand for connectivity with smaller towns along the way, that includes places like Congleton. It won’t be the principal route from the main cities, but if towns like Rugby, Milton Keynes, Stafford & Wolverhampton want to be connected to Manchester & Birmingham, then why not combine the services?

 

[DorkingMain]

Chester & North Wales perhaps? I also think there is a case for combining Manchester, Birmingham, London services as a semi-fast operation. There will be no need for the Avanti type services we have today, but there will be demand for connectivity with smaller towns along the way, that includes places like Congleton. It won’t be the principal route from the main cities, but if towns like Rugby, Milton Keynes, Stafford & Wolverhampton want to be connected to Manchester & Birmingham, then why not combine the services?

In theory a much increased service to North Wales would be possible without any increase in the number of paths. There's already an hourly Avanti service to Chester which could easily be extended.

Increased services to Shrewsbury / Wrexham / Llandudno / Bangor / Holyhead would definitely be nice, but then the key question is whether there's a realistic demand for them.

 

[Metrolink]

Apart from the Northampton service, which obviously stops there, how many of these would go via Northampton, calling there and at Long Buckby?

The rugeley, Crewe and Wolverhampton services.

 

[Purple Orange]

In theory a much increased service to North Wales would be possible without any increase in the number of paths. There's already an hourly Avanti service to Chester which could easily be extended.

Increased services to Shrewsbury / Wrexham / Llandudno / Bangor / Holyhead would definitely be nice, but then the key question is whether there's a realistic demand for them.

I think the demand will really be focussed on services in to the nearest city. South WCML obviously needs to be focussed on London first, but Birmingham second. Manchester is probably a tertiary market that 1 tph that connects Watford, MK, Rugby, Northampton to the north west suffices. North of Birmingham, Stoke, Stafford and Macclesfield will have 1 tph HS2 service and I see little point in replicating that service on the classic WCML with a train that is intended to compete on journey time, because it won’t succeed. Those towns will still want a Birmingham service, therefore I’d propose:

• 1 tph Euston, Watford, MK, Northampton, Rugby, Coventry, Bham Int, New Street, Sandwell & Dudley, Wolverhampton, Stafford, Stoke, Congleton, Macclesfield, Stockport, Piccadilly

 

[JonathanH]

Those towns will still want a Birmingham service, therefore I’d propose:

• 1 tph Euston, Watford, MK, Northampton, Rugby, Coventry, Bham Int, New Street, Sandwell & Dudley, Wolverhampton, Stafford, Stoke, Congleton, Macclesfield, Stockport, Piccadilly

Plus Marston Green, Coseley, Penkridge and Stone.

 

[Purple Orange]

I’m going to focus my suggestion on what I think should replace the current Avanti & Cross Country services on the WCML. Let’s look at what we currently have:

Avanti:

• Euston, Milton Keynes, Stoke, Stockport, Piccadilly
• Euston, Stoke, Macclesfield, Stockport, Piccadilly
• Euston, Crewe, Wilmslow, Stockport, Piccadilly
• Euston, Watford, Coventry, Birmingham Int, New Street
• Euston, Milton Keynes, Coventry, Birmingham Int, New Street, Sandwell & Dudley, Wolverhampton, Crewe, Warrington, Wigan, Preston,..., Scotland
• Euston, Rugby, Coventry, Birmingham Int, New Street
• Euston, Warrington, Wigan, Preston,..., Scotland
• Euston, Milton Keynes, Crewe, Chester, North Wales
• Euston, Stafford, Crewe, Runcorn, Liverpool

Plus an additional Liverpool and an extension of a Birmingham service to Shrewsbury.

Cross Country:

• Piccadilly, Stockport, Macclesfield, Stoke, Stafford, Wolverhampton, New Street, Birmingham International, Coventry,..., Reading,..., South Coast
• Piccadilly, Stockport, Macclesfield, Stoke, Stafford, Wolverhampton, New Street, Cheltenham, Bristol,..., South West

With this in mind, HS2 will capture the fast London market for Piccadilly, Stockport, Wilmslow, Crewe, Liverpool, Runcorn, Macclesfield, Stoke, Stafford, New Street, Birmingham International, Preston, Wigan & Scotland. It will also capture the fast Cross Country to Birmingham market for Piccadilly and Stockport, plus it will take out the Manchester & Leeds/Newcastle market for Reading and the South Coast, given that a change at OOC or Euston will be faster and more frequent.

Midlands Engine Rail appear to be proposing Bristol to Birmingham services start at Moor Street, with some continuing to Leicester/Nottingham.

Therefore what needs filling in it’s place? I’d go with the following:

• 1 tph Euston - Piccadilly, calling at:
  • Watford, MK, Northampton, Rugby, Coventry, Bham Int, New Street, Sandwell & Dudley, Wolverhampton, Stafford, Stoke, Congleton, Macclesfield and Stockport
• 1 tph Euston - North Wales, calling at:
  • Watford, Milton Keynes, Rugby, Crewe and Chester, North Wales
• 1 tph Euston - Wrexham, calling at:
  • Watford, Northampton, Rugby, Coventry, Bham Int, New Street, Sandwell & Dudley, Wolverhampton and Shrewsbury.
• 1 tph Euston - Wolverhampton, calling at:
  • Watford, MK, Coventry, Bham Int, New Street, Sandwell & Dudley

Remaining paths should be allocated to further semi-fast London North Western services and stoppers.

I

Plus Marston Green, Coseley, Penkridge and Stone.

I think they should get additional services but as localised stoppers

 

[JonathanH]

1 tph Euston - Wrexham, calling at:

• Watford, Northampton, Rugby, Coventry, Bham Int, New Street, Sandwell & Dudley, Wolverhampton and Shrewsbury.

If this is going to run to Wrexham, it will need to stop at Gobowen, Chirk and Ruabon. Wrexham is quicker via Chester in any case.

 

[Purple Orange]

If this is going to run to Wrexham, it will need to stop at Gobowen, Chirk and Ruabon. Wrexham is quicker via Chester in any case.

If it’s quicker via Chester, then perhaps curtailing at Shrewsbury is best.

 

[HST43257]

4tph Avanti
- 2 Birmingham (1 Scotland, 1 Wolves)
- 1 Manchester via Stoke
- 1 North Wales
Not getting into service pattern issues here and now

6tph LNWR Fast
- 2 Trent Valley Stoppers (first stop MKC, then RUG and then all TV stations)
- 4 Northampton Fast (2 calling at WFJ + MKC then all stations to RUG plus 2 first stop LBZ then all stations to B’ham)

4tph LNWR Slow
- 2 Tring stoppers (first stop WIJ, then HRW, BSH, WFJ and all stations to Tring) 4tph in peak
- 2 Northampton Semifast (existing pattern, but extra stops at Tring & Cheddington if possible)

 

[Metrolink]

- 2 Birmingham (1 Scotland, 1 Wolves)

I think Wolves is good but probably I wouldn’t say Scotland maybe Carlisle, extra trains to Scotland doesn’t seem worth it or economic
seeming as there is 3tp2h to Glasgow and Edinburgh from Euston in the plans, and it would better serve Oxenholme and Penrith seeming as that is one of the least beneficial from the planned timetable.

6tph LNWR Fast
- 2 Trent Valley Stoppers (first stop MKC, then RUG and then all TV stations)
- 4 Northampton Fast (2 calling at WFJ + MKC then all stations to RUG plus 2 first stop LBZ then all stations to B’ham)

What about a possible extension to Crewe via Stoke and Alsager?

 

[HSTEd]

I tried to do this exercise once, I came up with 4 or 5 ICWC trains per hour.

 

[Metrolink]

I tried to do this exercise once, I came up with 4 or 5 ICWC trains per hour.

What would yours be?

 

[HST43257]

I think Wolves is good but probably I wouldn’t say Scotland maybe Carlisle, extra trains to Scotland doesn’t seem worth it or economic

Milton Keynes and Birmingham to Scotland are the important services there. Not London. Scotland connections still needed.

What about a possible extension to Crewe via Stoke and Alsager?

I think the Colwich to Stone direct route should close, with both TV stoppers going to Stafford. 1tph of these would go direct to Crewe, then onto Liverpool via Runcorn. The other would go to Crewe via Stoke.