Is rail REALLY that bad in the North?

[anti-pacer]

I keep reading all these negative stories about rail in the North, but is it really all that bad?

The Pacers are going, Northern and TPE are getting new trains, we're getting lots of new services under "Northern Connect" and over on the east side of the Pennines we're getting new stock on VTEC services.

Yes, I know TPE services are permanently busy, but is Leeds to Manchester in 55 minutes so bad, given the topography of the route? Is that any worse than most other places outside the South East? Look at Bristol to Cardiff - it's no better. 2 trains an hour and one of them is generally a 150. Leeds to Manchester has 2 routes with a total of 8 trains per hour if I'm not mistaken, at present.

From where I live in Wakefield, I can catch 8 trains an hour to Leeds, in as little as 15 minutes. Sheffield on the fastest train is about 25 minutes away, and Doncaster is as little as 15 minutes away. However, TPE routes aren't as fast and yes they could be faster, but the area of improvement I think we need, certainly in the "Metro" area is later trains. I'd rather have later trains from Leeds than the opportunity to get to Manchester 10 minutes earlier.

As for London trains, well, I have 2 per hour on VTEC and the odd one on GC. I have before travelled down to London and been in Ilford (East London) on a Saturday an hour before most shops open, eating a McDonald's breakfast, which I'm partly ashamed to say I love.

More trains are needed and newer stock, but it's on its way and personally I don't think rail travel up here is that bad at all.

 

[Harpers Tate]

In my opinion the main thing that is recurrently "wrong" with rail in the North (and quite possibly elsewhere too) is quite simply the inadequate size of the trains. And not just at peak commuting times. Other flows, whether recurrent or predictable occasional events, are just not catered for.

We actually don't really need more trains crossing the Pennines; therefore, we don't need stupidly large investment in infrastructure. A 20 or 30 minute frequency is adequate. What is not adequate is the length of the trains. Bigger trains need no more crew and no more paths.

And we don't really need them to be quicker; just need to be able to get on and travel in comfort.

 

[anti-pacer]

In my opinion the main thing that is recurrently "wrong" with rail in the North (and quite possibly elsewhere too) is quite simply the inadequate size of the trains. And not just at peak commuting times. Other flows, whether recurrent or predictable occasional events, are just not catered for.

We actually don't really need more trains crossing the Pennines; therefore, we don't need stupidly large investment in infrastructure. A 20 or 30 minute frequency is adequate. What is not adequate is the length of the trains. Bigger trains need no more crew and no more paths.

And we don't really need them to be quicker; just need to be able to get on and travel in comfort.

Size of trains seems only to be an issue in either the peak hours, or on certain routes.

When I commuted the short distance to Leeds, most trains were 4 carriages and whilst busy, they were generally only full from Outwood, a journey of less than 15 minutes. Even then they weren't "crush loaded".

The Airedale line into Leeds seems to suffer the worst, and I believe there are plans to run 6-car trains in the peaks following the introduction of the new 331's.

TPE routes are busy all day long, and from what I've seen of the Manchester Airport-Scotland routes, overcrowding is a real issue. However, given the magnetic pull of London, despite their longer trains, their overcrowding in most cases is worse than ours. That said, I lived in Manchester back in the late 90's/early 00's and used to catch the tram to work from Victoria to Stretford. The overcrowding on there was severe. You were literally held up by other people, although after St Peter's Square it eased off and I was able to get a seat.

 

[johnr57]

what you describe only reflects the experience of the "sort of urban" commuter. some of us live in very rural areas of north yorkshire (other rural areas do exist). public transport generally in any of these areas is ridiculously poor not just rail. i live close to helmsley, disregarding the 45 minute walk to the nearest bus stop, we have the "early" bus that gets us to york (malton is nearer but the bus company haven't realised that yet) just after the 0958/1003 to KGX services have left. then of course we need to get home, the "last" late night bus leaves york station at 1710. for your information the taxi fare from my house to YRK is £65. sorry for hijacking to what should be another thread.

 

[NorthernSpirit]

Taking in consideration that I live between two stations (Huddersfield and Brighouse), the latter has a dreadful Sunday service of one service per two hours (its been that way since 2000 when Brighouse reopened) not including the GC's to London. Meanwhile Huddersfield has a reasonable Sunday service.

So in terms of is rail really that bad in the North, then in most aspects yes unless your served by TPE who at least have some overnight services but on any of the other routes your hard done by. An improvement would be to run certain services 'til at least 2am to cater for the drunks, who are currently having to use the circa 2300 services on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights to get home as there's no nightbus for them to use nor any late night rail services for them to use.

I could say that the Penistone Line is also hard done by what with it having no late Sunday evening service, if one was laid on at lets say 2200 from Sheffield which served Meadowhall then fast to Barnsley then all stops Huddersfield it could well be used, but I suspect this will be down to the rural areas that it serves.

 

[J-2739]

I think you might be forgetting the North East, which seems to be doing worse!

 

[anti-pacer]

I think you might be forgetting the North East, which seems to be doing worse!

In what way?

 

[47802]

I keep reading all these negative stories about rail in the North, but is it really all that bad?

The Pacers are going, Northern and TPE are getting new trains, we're getting lots of new services under "Northern Connect" and over on the east side of the Pennines we're getting new stock on VTEC services.

Yes, I know TPE services are permanently busy, but is Leeds to Manchester in 55 minutes so bad, given the topography of the route? Is that any worse than most other places outside the South East? Look at Bristol to Cardiff - it's no better. 2 trains an hour and one of them is generally a 150. Leeds to Manchester has 2 routes with a total of 8 trains per hour if I'm not mistaken, at present.

From where I live in Wakefield, I can catch 8 trains an hour to Leeds, in as little as 15 minutes. Sheffield on the fastest train is about 25 minutes away, and Doncaster is as little as 15 minutes away. However, TPE routes aren't as fast and yes they could be faster, but the area of improvement I think we need, certainly in the "Metro" area is later trains. I'd rather have later trains from Leeds than the opportunity to get to Manchester 10 minutes earlier.

As for London trains, well, I have 2 per hour on VTEC and the odd one on GC. I have before travelled down to London and been in Ilford (East London) on a Saturday an hour before most shops open, eating a McDonald's breakfast, which I'm partly ashamed to say I love.

More trains are needed and newer stock, but it's on its way and personally I don't think rail travel up here is that bad at all.

Well I think the things that are happening with the new franchise should improve the situation quite a bit but frankly its long overdue and a lot of it should have been done in the last franchise.

The North of England has a population 3 times the size of Scotland with the population of Yorkshire and Humberside alone being similar to that of Scotland yet Scotland has no Pacers while the North is infested with them, that suggests to me a lot of improvement is long overdue.

As for poor transport in rural Yorkshire especially if there is no rail route, well I think that's the case in many parts of the country unfortunately.

I think we also need to remember that the Railways in general have come out of a period of significant decline to a period of significant growth and I think is taken the government far too long to really get with that.

 

[PR1Berske]

In short, yes, rail in the North is as bad as people say. I am a resident of Preston, I use the railways almost every weekend of each month, and can truly say that things are horrendous up here.

When London wants new stations, London gets them. Ditto a cross-borough railway. Ditto an entirely new high-speed railway into Euston.

The North hardly gets the crumbs from London's table. I think we can all agree that DfT, based in London, only look at the country from within the boundaries of Greater London and the Home Counties. That is why we still have Pacers up here, why new stations come very few and far between (both geographically and in terms of time). It's why stock tends to be loaned to loanees who are loaned to someone else who are loaned to someone else who might be promised to someone else. Yes, we get stock up here, but it's third-hand. London asks for new stock: London gets it.

I am a proud northerner. I know that the economy of this country will always be skewed towards London, which is why the gap between London and northern rail funding is so many billions. I have been accused of being "bitter" and all sorts of things (not on here) about my attitude, but it's only from experiencing the true state of railways. I know, as fact, that something as Tank Engine old-fashioned as the tokens on the Ormskirk line would never be allowed elsewhere: it's even worse when you think of the dank, damp, clapped out single-carriages which trundle along it!

 

[Andyh82]

I agree with the OP in that I have no problem with the frequency of trains across the Pennines or in the case of TPE how long they take. Therefore I'd be against any funding being entirely focussed towards the so called HS3

The problems we have here are poor quality stock and not enough of it, I'm not sure we will have enough even when Northern get their new trains. There is also any journey that involves Crosscountry which will continue to have this problem.

The other issue is the almost entire lack of passing loops or quadruple tracking meaning everything is double track and therefore there is inadequate capacity to provide express services and stoppers without compromising one or the other. Rather than HS3 I'd spend money looking at quick wins of this nature on both the Caldervale Line and the Huddersfield Line. A few loops or extra bits of track where it is easy to do so, should make a big difference.

Frequencies on some lines that are only hourly or less and that finish too early is an issue as well.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In my experience the primary issue is the short trains.

If all the Pacers were actually 3-car Class 172s, and the 185s were 5-car, and the new TPE stock was to be 8-car sets etc, and a few more wires went up, it'd be just fine, I reckon.

 

[anti-pacer]

I agree with the OP in that I have no problem with the frequency of trains across the Pennines or in the case of TPE how long they take. Therefore I'd be against any funding being entirely focussed towards the so called HS3

The problems we have here are poor quality stock and not enough of it, I'm not sure we will have enough even when Northern get their new trains. There is also any journey that involves Crosscountry which will continue to have this problem.

The other issue is the almost entire lack of passing loops or quadruple tracking meaning everything is double track and therefore there is inadequate capacity to provide express services and stoppers without compromising one or the other. Rather than HS3 I'd spend money looking at quick wins of this nature on both the Caldervale Line and the Huddersfield Line. A few loops or extra bits of track where it is easy to do so, should make a big difference.

Frequencies on some lines that are only hourly or less and that finish too early is an issue as well.

I don't disagree that the new stock on both Northern and TPE is not enough, but we're not as bad as ATW, EMT or the far south western parts of GWR. Why Norfolk and Suffolk are getting brand new stock to replace ALL their stock, god knows.

 

[HSTEd]

Quadrouple track is hardly a quick win.

Electrification was going to help make timetables work by improving stopping journey times - but that has fallen by the wayside now thanks to the runaway costs of electrification.

I have now come to the conclusion that given that third rail electrification is certainly out outside of maybe a few tiny extensions to Merseyrail, HS3 is now the only option for significant improvements of rail service offerings outside simply providing more stock.

 

[PR1Berske]

Quadrouple track is hardly a quick win.

Electrification was going to help make timetables work by improving stopping journey times - but that has fallen by the wayside now thanks to the runaway costs of electrification.

I have now come to the conclusion that given that third rail electrification is certainly out outside of maybe a few tiny extensions to Merseyrail, HS3 is now the only option for significant improvements of rail service offerings outside simply providing more stock.

But nobody can yet agree - here or elsewhere - what HS3 actually *is* and who it'd actually serve. Is it a northern cross-rail, is it a brand new service connecting east-with-west, is it a European style commuter line, will it compliment existing lines, will it replace them...?

This is the great issue with rail up here. Little or no overall vision. I notice London always has an "umbrella" approach (Crossrail is for X, it does Z and will help with Q; Overground was created for Z, it has helped with Q and is branded to slot in with ABC). What does the North have to compare?

I agree with posters above, we do need more than just sticking plasters. But who will deliver them..?

 

[Abpj17]

In short, yes, rail in the North is as bad as people say. I am a resident of Preston, I use the railways almost every weekend of each month, and can truly say that things are horrendous up here.

When London wants new stations, London gets them. Ditto a cross-borough railway. Ditto an entirely new high-speed railway into Euston.

The North hardly gets the crumbs from London's table. I think we can all agree that DfT, based in London, only look at the country from within the boundaries of Greater London and the Home Counties. That is why we still have Pacers up here, why new stations come very few and far between (both geographically and in terms of time). It's why stock tends to be loaned to loanees who are loaned to someone else who are loaned to someone else who might be promised to someone else. Yes, we get stock up here, but it's third-hand. London asks for new stock: London gets it.

I am a proud northerner. I know that the economy of this country will always be skewed towards London, which is why the gap between London and northern rail funding is so many billions. I have been accused of being "bitter" and all sorts of things (not on here) about my attitude, but it's only from experiencing the true state of railways. I know, as fact, that something as Tank Engine old-fashioned as the tokens on the Ormskirk line would never be allowed elsewhere: it's even worse when you think of the dank, damp, clapped out single-carriages which trundle along it!

And that does read as over-biased. A lot of that is driven - as you imply - by relative population (and growth). Commuter trains in and around London are regularly crush loaded. Unsurprisingly station upgrades and new stations are required to cope with population growth and wear and tear. Many of London's stations are still Victorian underneath.

And as you say in a later post, a strategic approach would help to drive a more coordinated approach. Perhaps lobby for that?

 

[yorksrob]

There are many wonderful things about the Northern railway system, however, alongside trains that are too short, there are also the myriad of timetabling issues that prevent the regional railway from playing its full role in the economy.

Late first trains, early last trains, poor sunday services, poor connections. A lot of these issues don't require vast amounts of rolling stock or infrastructure spending to sort them out, however we are still waiting. It seems that the next two timetabling changes should address some of these problems, however whether they are all sorted out (particularly on my local line) remamains to be seen.

In terms of London services, I think they are pretty good. I certainly wouldn't want services from Yorkshire to be much faster as it runs the risk of the area becoming a London dormitory.

 

[underbank]

The railways in North Lancashire, Cumbria and Yorkshire are really poor. There is so much potential but people either don't travel or they use their cars instead. The lines are there, but they are infested by Pacers (or even worse - single carriage trains), totally unsuitable for the long journeys, often over-crowded. When I say "long", I don't mean distance, I mean rime due to them stopping everywhere (no "through" or direct/express/fast trains) and not having priority at junctions etc. A journey that takes less than an hour by car (not on motorways either) can take more than 2 hours by train, in a cramped environment with no facilities. They're overcrowded because they don't run frequently enough. If there were decent trains, with a decent timetable, people would use them.

 

[DimTim]

We have electric computer trains in Manchester, there are similar in Leeds - what's the problem?

If Northern wanted to shuffle their stock between each area - simples!

DOH - they need to go via either Edinburgh or London!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Quadrouple track is hardly a quick win.

The best quick win is a big order (much bigger than Northern's present one) of bi-mode multiple units of at least 4 23m cars (or 5 20m, or 6 section FLIRTs, or whatever, it really doesn't matter that much).

The order should be large enough to abolish single car working entirely, and 2-car working on all but the quietest branch lines, with all other trains an absolute minimum of 3x23m or 4x20m (Pacers out), with most trains longer than that.

The units should have regional express style interiors similar to the 350s or 170s. Don't overly care if they have 1st or not.

I have now come to the conclusion that given that third rail electrification is certainly out outside of maybe a few tiny extensions to Merseyrail, HS3 is now the only option for significant improvements of rail service offerings outside simply providing more stock.

If they can't wire existing routes, HS3 is pie in the sky.

 

[unlevel42]

The GC crawls from Bradford to Wakefield.

Two sections of single track between Sheffield and Manchester.

I have a conspiracy theory that sprinters and timetabling are used to limit demand on many routes. eg the unadvertised through trains between Sheffield and Bradford.

 

[dewsnapsliding]

Hyde North, 8.6 miles from Piccadilly, hourly 2-car service.

Shambles.

 

[darloscott]

There are too many infrequent services to make rail an option when travelling over a short or medium distance in the north. They simply aren't competitive with the car. Where they are comparatively acceptable, they are often overcrowded due to lack of capacity and/or frequency. TPE services should not be having to move the majority of short distance passengers and this would free up space for longer distance customers, but unfortunately even the order for new stock would appear to be too small, 5 car trains will just about cope with today's amount of passengers, never mind the next lot of growth that will come from 6 services an hour. There is a huge lack of vision when planning in the North.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There are too many infrequent services to make rail an option when travelling over a short or medium distance in the north.

Or rather, frequency is done the wrong way - city local services are low frequency (they need to be higher - at least half hourly, probably better) and regional expresses are short trains running on high frequencies (they need to be very long trains running on lower frequencies, portion worked if desired).

It's totally backside-about-face, as it were.

 

[Darandio]

We have electric computer trains in Manchester, there are similar in Leeds - what's the problem?

Well there we go then, close the thread already.

Everyone in the north must live in Manchester and Leeds and are well catered for. No problem. :roll:

 

[a_c_skinner]

You don't have to use many trains around Leeds and Manchester or on the Furness Line to know that there are long periods when ridership is plainly limited by capacity. Round Newcastle I suspect less so but I didn't use them as much at peak time.

 

[anti-pacer]

The GC crawls from Bradford to Wakefield.

Two sections of single track between Sheffield and Manchester.

I have a conspiracy theory that sprinters and timetabling are used to limit demand on many routes. eg the unadvertised through trains between Sheffield and Bradford.

GC crawls between Wakefield and just north of Doncaster too. It limps when it passes the back of my flat. I travelled down to London with them once last year. Never again! I will stick to VTEC.

 

[urbophile]

The problem goes back far behind rail planning strategy. It's about the relative economies of the South East and the rest of the country (not just the north, but thats what this thread is about.) No government is prepared to look far enough ahead, or be visionary enough, to invest in rebalancing this economy, although providing a decent transport system would help to kick-start this.
It's not enough just to say 'London is where the jobs are and where most people choose (?) to live, therefore it should get the lion's share of transport funding.'

 

[anti-pacer]

We have electric computer trains in Manchester, there are similar in Leeds....

Them electric COMPUTER trains are great aren't they?

I love how the driver uses an Apple Mac to drive the train. Amazing!

 

[J-2739]

In what way?

It's the only region that's not getting brand new local stock, and the Northern Connect network is pretty slim up there (only one line, but served by 158s, and let's see how well they refurbish it)

I can acknowledge frequency upgrades, but at the end, the level of investment there is pretty low compared to the other regions. What happened to the Tees Valley Metro??

 

[brompton rail]

Them electric COMPUTER trains are great aren't they?

I love how the driver uses an Apple Mac to drive the train. Amazing!

Judging by most of the Northern trains I see around here - they are more likely driven by. BBC Micro than an Apple Mac