Is rail REALLY that bad in the North?

[HSTEd]

What's wrong with token working?

It's slow, inefficient and labour intensive.

 

[Moonshot]

It's slow, inefficient and labour intensive.

Works well between Rainford and Kirkby .....trains reach 70 mph. The token handover takes a matter of seconds between 1 signaller and 1 driver.

 

[HSTEd]

Works well between Rainford and Kirkby .....trains reach 70 mph. The token handover takes a matter of seconds between 1 signaller and 1 driver.

SO the trains reach a slow speed and and it requires a signaller at the token handover point?

So 30mph slower than they could be doing, not counting the required decelleration, and one more signaller than is actually required in a modern system?

 

[Moonshot]

SO the trains reach a slow speed and and it requires a signaller at the token handover point?

So 30mph slower than they could be doing, not counting the required decelleration, and one more signaller than is actually required in a modern system?

No......trains call at Rainford station and then travel about 20 yards or so to the token point. Removing this wouldnt achieve any time saving whatsoever. A recent addition into the mix is a freight train run.

 

[HSTEd]

No......trains call at Rainford station and then travel about 20 yards or so to the token point. Removing this wouldnt achieve any time saving whatsoever. A recent addition into the mix is a freight train run.

A freight train has to slow to a stop when it would otherwise be free to proceed through the station at line speed?

A 20 yard crawl to the token exchange point is still an operational inefficiency that could be dispensed with.
And a manned signal box is an expensive way to run a railway today - controlling one additional block section has a marginal cost of a small fraction of a signaller using modern equipment.

Modern equipment would also permit the freight trains to be flighted with a passenger train on the branch - which significantly improves operational flexibility and reliability.

 

[Edgeley]

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.

That’s about the sum of it. We don’t need a grandiose ‘grand projet’. Tweaks to track alignment and a few more stations being re-opened, together with a commitment to future electrification, will help to keep people happy. But most significant in northerners’ perception of their railway system is the quality – and quantity - of the rolling stock. There is a chicken and egg situation here as around the north rail has to compete with other modes of transport. It is feasible, for example, for someone in a fairly low-paid job to drive into Manchester and be able to afford to park for the day on the periphery of the city centre. Rail has to offer an attractive alternative.

 

[Moonshot]

A freight train has to slow to a stop when it would otherwise be free to proceed through the station at line speed?

A 20 yard crawl to the token exchange point is still an operational inefficiency that could be dispensed with.
And a manned signal box is an expensive way to run a railway today - controlling one additional block section has a marginal cost of a small fraction of a signaller using modern equipment.

Modern equipment would also permit the freight trains to be flighted with a passenger train on the branch - which significantly improves operational flexibility and reliability.

Not quite....the box sits on a junction with a 15mph speed over the points from double to single track. The crawl would still be there. Whilst I understand what you are saying , what struck me just the other day when i was down that way was considering how old fashioned this system is, its also extremely simple.

 

[Moonshot]

That’s about the sum of it. We don’t need a grandiose ‘grand projet’. Tweaks to track alignment and a few more stations being re-opened, together with a commitment to future electrification, will help to keep people happy. But most significant in northerners’ perception of their railway system is the quality – and quantity - of the rolling stock. There is a chicken and egg situation here as around the north rail has to compete with other modes of transport. It is feasible, for example, for someone in a fairly low-paid job to drive into Manchester and be able to afford to park for the day on the periphery of the city centre. Rail has to offer an attractive alternative.

It does.....numbers have been growing over the last few years or so.

 

[Old Yard Dog]

Bradford, the 10th biggest city in England is only served by slow stopping trains plus four GC trains a day to London which take over 90 mins to get to Doncaster and a slightly faster Virgin one which doesn't run off peak. It has no direct connections to Liverpool, Sheffield, Hull or Birmingham. Bradford will not get a spur to HS2 and is unlikely to be on the route of HS3.

It would currently take me well over 3.5 hrs to do my fortnightly trip from Ellesmere Port by train and 4.5 hrs door to door. So I drive. Roll on Northern Connect which should offer some improvement.

 

[Greybeard33]

Also I wouldn't say there is any need for anything to be more frequent than every 15 mins. If more capacity is needed it should be done by train lengths. I'm not sure we need 6 TPEs per hour. Two to Liverpool, two to Manchester Airport, but each with 5-6 carriages would be sufficient at off peak times. This would leave more room for local stoppers which should be 4 cars rather than the current 2 and could perhaps run twice an hour rather than the current hourly.

Which is effectively what is happening from the May 2018 timetable change. Except that the two "stoppers" will be operated by TPE not Northern and will be skip-stop, so the smaller stations will still only get an hourly service. Pending electrification, the Diggle line does not have the capacity for two all-stations services in between four expresses.

 

[47802]

Bradford, the 10th biggest city in England is only served by slow stopping trains plus four GC trains a day to London which take over 90 mins to get to Doncaster and a slightly faster Virgin one which doesn't run off peak. It has no direct connections to Liverpool, Sheffield, Hull or Birmingham. Bradford will not get a spur to HS2 and is unlikely to be on the route of HS3.

It would currently take me well over 3.5 hrs to do my fortnightly trip from Ellesmere Port by train and 4.5 hrs door to door. So I drive. Roll on Northern Connect which should offer some improvement.

Is Bradford that hard done by I don't think so, the services that Bradford get have been steadily improving and Northern Connect is going to offer Bradford Through Trains to Liverpool, Manchester Airport and Sheffield/Nottingham.

Plus don't forget Bradford's proximity to Leeds, I live on the South Side of Bradford but with a better bus service to Leeds from where I live its frequently more handy for me to catch the train from Leeds

 

[Bletchleyite]

[/B]

It does.....numbers have been growing over the last few years or so.

No, it doesn't. It offers a "less worse" option than increasing traffic congestion.

The conditions on TPE and some of Northern are grim. Much, much more grim than a good many London commuter operations, most of which, once you get outside of the innersuburban operations, are nowhere near as overcrowded as people think they are. There are LM trains that leave Euston in the evening peak with the front few coaches maybe 50-60% occupied.

 

[158756]

Of my local services, I would say that the Blackpool South to Colne service takes an age to get anywhere, and the Blackpool North-York and Manchester services are not fast either, though the former is at least faster than the very poor roads to Yorkshire. The passenger environment of much of Northern's fleet is generally worse than a bus, and the whole thing, with a few exceptions under the new franchise and the non railway-funded station in Burnley, has a feel of neglect about it.

 

[driver_m]

Looking at this question from a slightly different angle. Are there two large cities as badly linked together as Manchester and Sheffield in the rest of the UK? One route closed and ruined by some extremely short term planning and the other one has a single track at one point. (Plus terrible road links that are both single carriageway and at the mercy of the weather) Links to the East Midlands are poor too from the North West. Both journeys from either Liverpool or Crewe trundle along very slowly.

I'd say the answer is yes, transport in the North is bad. Though rather than just blame London, you could say the PTE's of the past didn't help. Merseyside and GM had their artificial boundaries which truncated services such as those at Kirkby. We need this TfN to get joined up areas so that it's just the same to do say Warrington to Manchester or Liverpool for the same price and the same consistency for the day like you'd get in London or even Glasgow which has a superb transport system

 

[Cheshire Rover]

The frequency of services through Helsby to Manchester and North Wales are fine and we will soon be back to the 70's with through trains to Liverpool via the Halton Curve and services to Man Vic in the peak. For a very small station I'd say that direct access hourly to Liverpool, Manchester, Chester and beyond is very good.

The issue is overcrowding. Northern were sold a pup with their no growth franchise and ATW have done their best with the loco hauled on the peaks but in reality the stock does not have the capacity. Even if you increase capacity, as Northern did with the 319's, they just fill up within a few months.

And of course if you were able to lengthen trains, many of the smaller stations in the North would need their platforms extending to cope, unless the guards can only open so many doors. It all starts to get very expensive.

Compared to the South, especially the SE we do get a raw deal financially I think, but the small infill projects and minor electrification programmes could make a big difference if the stock were sufficient.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Looking at this question from a slightly different angle. Are there two large cities as badly linked together as Manchester and Sheffield in the rest of the UK?

Oxford and Cambridge?

In all seriousness, the North's web-like service, if slower, allows far more journeys that aren't just to one big city compared with the South's which is basically all about getting to London, with other markets very much secondary or even completely unserved.

As for Manchester-Sheffield, all it urgently needs is longer trains. I've used it and I don't think it's a bad service per-se.

 

[Ianno87]

Oxford and Cambridge?

In all seriousness, the North's web-like service, if slower, allows far more journeys that aren't just to one big city compared with the South's which is basically all about getting to London, with other markets very much secondary or even completely unserved.

As for Manchester-Sheffield, all it urgently needs is longer trains. I've used it and I don't think it's a bad service per-se.

Compared to the road journey from Manchester to Sheffield, rail is a dream. Doesn't fare too badly for having a major National Park in the middle.

 

[HSTEd]

Not quite....the box sits on a junction with a 15mph speed over the points from double to single track. The crawl would still be there. Whilst I understand what you are saying , what struck me just the other day when i was down that way was considering how old fashioned this system is, its also extremely simple.

Well that is unfortunately some sort of chicken and egg problem - if the trains have to crawl there anyway for the changeover there is no need to increase the junction's speed.

Simple systems are not the best these days however - it is worth noting tha electrification and a more modern signalling system would likely allow two trains to run through from central Liverpool to Wigan Wallgate without adding any additional trackwork.

 

[Eccles1983]

Without additional trackwork?

I take it you're ignoring the buffers, bridge and lack of track between kirkby (northern) and kirkby (merseyrail)

 

[Moonshot]

Well that is unfortunately some sort of chicken and egg problem - if the trains have to crawl there anyway for the changeover there is no need to increase the junction's speed.

Simple systems are not the best these days however - it is worth noting tha electrification and a more modern signalling system would likely allow two trains to run through from central Liverpool to Wigan Wallgate without adding any additional trackwork.

Theoretically Northern could do that now from Kirkby just by eliminating the 25 minute layover at Kirkby.

 

[pemma]

The frequency of services through Helsby to Manchester and North Wales are fine and we will soon be back to the 70's with through trains to Liverpool via the Halton Curve and services to Man Vic in the peak. For a very small station I'd say that direct access hourly to Liverpool, Manchester, Chester and beyond is very good.

I think service provision at many village stations in Cheshire is excellent. However, some small towns have the same frequency of service as villages which can barely justify having their own station. Why should a small village get the same number of services as a town with 100 times it's population?

 

[Moonshot]

To answer the original question of is rail really that bad up North....imo as a frontline staff member for Northern, no its not. It does exactly what it says on the tin in getting people from A to B in increasing numbers year on year. The aesthetics of some of the fleet are not the best, but nonetheless as we all know , some significant numbers of brand new trains are heading this way.

 

[SamYeager]

There was a brief report on Northern Powerhouse on the Beeb this morning and I was pleased to note that the presenter mentioned that every time this subject is covered she gets messages that rail investment in the south west and midlands isn't that brilliant either. I don't begrudge rail investment in the north as long as the rest of the country is not ignored.

 

[MichaelAMW]

It's slow, inefficient and labour intensive.

When I take a little tripette out to Matlock, the driver seems to manage the process pretty well and takes only a minute to do so, and that's without a signaller to help. Its down side is when the token exchange takes place away from a station stop but I imagine there can't be many of those left. I'm not sure how it would ever be labour intensive.

 

[MichaelAMW]

A freight train has to slow to a stop when it would otherwise be free to proceed through the station at line speed?

A 20 yard crawl to the token exchange point is still an operational inefficiency that could be dispensed with.
And a manned signal box is an expensive way to run a railway today - controlling one additional block section has a marginal cost of a small fraction of a signaller using modern equipment.

Modern equipment would also permit the freight trains to be flighted with a passenger train on the branch - which significantly improves operational flexibility and reliability.

That's an irrelevance: what you are (now) talking about is the matter of upgrading and centralising signalling, which is separate from whether token working is good or bad. Large-scale investment needs to wait its turn.

 

[HSTEd]

That's an irrelevance: what you are (now) talking about is the matter of upgrading and centralising signalling, which is separate from whether token working is good or bad. Large-scale investment needs to wait its turn.

Token Working requires operational constraints and many more staff - as demonstrated here, that makes it bad.

Token Worked routes are unlikely to ever be economic, that makes it bad.

Without additional trackwork?

I take it you're ignoring the buffers, bridge and lack of track between kirkby (northern) and kirkby (merseyrail)

Well yes, but that is hardly a huge job compared to potentially miles of doubling that might have been required.
Judging by images available there is about 20 feet of track missing, the platform walkway in the way would be demolished and the track reinstated.
There would be no need for passengers to walk under the bridge since you would only need one of the two platform segments.

When I take a little tripette out to Matlock, the driver seems to manage the process pretty well and takes only a minute to do so, and that's without a signaller to help. Its down side is when the token exchange takes place away from a station stop but I imagine there can't be many of those left. I'm not sure how it would ever be labour intensive.

A train coming to a stop in the middle of nowhere, waiting there for a minute before accelerating back to line speed again might not be labour intensive - but it is not the sort of thing that makes an effective public transport system.

 

[MichaelAMW]

Looking at this question from a slightly different angle. Are there two large cities as badly linked together as Manchester and Sheffield in the rest of the UK? One route closed and ruined by some extremely short term planning and the other one has a single track at one point. (Plus terrible road links that are both single carriageway and at the mercy of the weather) Links to the East Midlands are poor too from the North West. Both journeys from either Liverpool or Crewe trundle along very slowly.

It's hard to see how the weather can be changed on top of a high hill. I wouldn't call an average of about 50 on a Liverpool to Nottingham to be trundling along very slowly, particularly given all the places it needs to stop and serve.

 

[6Gman]

So, to summarise, the North needs:

1. More trains
2. Longer trains
3. New trains
4. Electrification, 4-tracking and new stations
5. Infrastructure works at key points (e.g. Dore, Ardwick)

Just remind me ... what's the current level of subsidy for Northern Rail?

 

[6Gman]

It's slow, inefficient and labour intensive.

But inexpensive, or it would be replaced.

 

[pemma]

There was a brief report on Northern Powerhouse on the Beeb this morning and I was pleased to note that the presenter mentioned that every time this subject is covered she gets messages that rail investment in the south west and midlands isn't that brilliant either. I don't begrudge rail investment in the north as long as the rest of the country is not ignored.

What's annoying is the comparisons of the 'North' to one specific region. If investment was proportional to population then the Midlands (West and East combined) would get the same sort of level of investment as Yorkshire and the North East combined. While the South West and Wales combined would only get slightly more than the North West alone.

However, it's difficult to say exactly exactly how much is spent in each area. For example, brand new 195s are being obtained for Bradford to Nottingham. What proportion of the cost of the new 195s actually counts as investment in the East Midlands?