Liverpool Norwich service to be split at Nottingham

[Killingworth]

The line serves more passengers per year than London to Manchester, and the fares aren't especially cheap. With the passenger numbers heavily weighted to the western portion, it is obvious (half) the reason why dft entertained the split: a massive service reduction for the eastern portion.

TPE may well feel they get enough revenue as is, but despite its trundling and circuitous route it isn't a.basket case by any stretch.

Sorry, I'm not sure I follow this. Which line serves more passengers than London to Manchester? Possibly the first passenger railway in Britain, the Liverpool and Manchester leg of this long Liverpool-Norwich trek.

A massive service reduction for the Eastern section? The split at Nottingham will certainly be inconvenient for those travelling through that city. Is there any evidence of a reduction in the service operating between Nottingham and Norwich?

 

[td97]

Split does frustrate passenger journeys, with minor reduction expected.
In the interest of a single express service operator.
DfT wish for marketing opportunities to boost pax on Manchester-Sheffield to offset the loss from splitting the service.
Changing services is the issue: pax are less comfortable changing on long distance services at unfamiliar stations.

Is there any evidence of a reduction in the service operating between Nottingham and Norwich?

No think there should be later evening journeys and more evening peak strengthening.

 

[Jonny]

Split does frustrate passenger journeys, with minor reduction expected.
In the interest of a single express service operator.
DfT wish for marketing opportunities to boost pax on Manchester-Sheffield to offset the loss from splitting the service.
Changing services is the issue: pax are less comfortable changing on long distance services at unfamiliar stations.

No think there should be later evening journeys and more evening peak strengthening.

Given the tendency to overcrowding through the Hope Valley, anything that ^persuades^ passengers to consider other routes where it is practicable is surely a good thing. Especially as an end-to-end journey via London is hardly any slower. In fact, a quick NRES search offers to send passengers via London with a lower journey time.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They could always offer enough capacity.... a Mk5 LHCS set or 6.185 all day (ideally converted to more Standard) should do the trick.

 

[Killingworth]

They could always offer enough capacity.... a Mk5 LHCS set or 6.185 all day (ideally converted to more Standard) should do the trick.

The 185 has the inherent fault of no connection between the two units without it being at a platform.

Example; a 6 car 185 leaving Sheffield will have all the reserved seats in first 3 carriages. Season ticket holders don't get reserved seats, so they naturally go in the rear unit.

At commuting times there are quite a lot of first class travellers, some with season tickets. (Neither EMR nor Northern offer first class so they're concentrated onto TPE.) Reserved seats in Coach A at the front, season ticket holders probably going in the back. No way to equalise the load once aboard.

At 7.14 train arrives at 4 car platform Dore & Totley where 90+ maybe waiting to board, almost 2 carriage's worth, many first class. There may be space in one half but not the other. You place your bet, choose a spot on the platform, and cross fingers that 6 cars actually turn up*. If they don't you may be going back home for the car!

Not sure how this is going to work when the first half doesn't always go to the Airport and is detached at Piccadilly.

With modern communications the jungle drums usually pass the message down the platform that it's sardines today so some will walk out for the car even before the train arrives.

 

[TheBigD]

Is there any evidence of a reduction in the service operating between Nottingham and Norwich?

Quite the opposite. The Sunday service will be increased to hourly. Currently there is a 3 hour westbound gap on Sunday between the 1047 and 1347 departures from Norwich.

 

[Killingworth]

Quite the opposite. The Sunday service will be increased to hourly. Currently there is a 3 hour westbound gap on Sunday between the 1047 and 1347 departures from Norwich.

Quite. So no massive service reduction in the Eastern section other than the need to change at Nottingham for some journeys.

However I can identify with that being a major service reduction for the group I've met who travel from Manchester to Grantham every week and work on the train.

But it may not be as bad as some have suggested. It may only be the need to count on a connection. Instead of using the direct, but slow, EMR service a quicker option is TPE to Doncaster and ECML to Grantham, typically saving about 25 minutes on the journey time.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The 185 has the inherent fault of no connection between the two units without it being at a platform.

It is an annoyance, but evidenced by the many services in the South East running in that kind of formation it isn't that much of an issue. It's certainly preferable to a 4-car train.

 

[Class 170101]

Quite the opposite. The Sunday service will be increased to hourly. Currently there is a 3 hour westbound gap on Sunday between the 1047 and 1347 departures from Norwich.

TheBigD have you heard anything about evening services? The 20:52 on a Sunday night from Norwich stands out compared to the rest of the week at 18:57. Any news on whether the 20:52 would operate Monday to Saturday as well?

 

[ABB125]

I had a flick through RAIL yesterday in a shop, and apparently (according to someone from EMR) there are three options for the split:

• Transfer to TPE (preferred). This would probably be run by class 185s, with TPE taking back the 22 they are sending off lease, or class 68s and Mk 5s
• Transfer to Northern
• Don't split

Yes I am aware of the reputation of RAIL, but this information supposedly came from an official source, so is likely to be accurate.

If TPE run it with class 68s, presumably these would be transferred from their currently planned Scarborough and Middlesbrough duties. What would then replace them here?

 

[class26]

I had a flick through RAIL yesterday in a shop, and apparently (according to someone from EMR) there are three options for the split:

• Transfer to TPE (preferred). This would probably be run by class 185s, with TPE taking back the 22 they are sending off lease, or class 68s and Mk 5s
• Transfer to Northern
• Don't split

Yes I am aware of the reputation of RAIL, but this information supposedly came from an official source, so is likely to be accurate.

If TPE run it with class 68s, presumably these would be transferred from their currently planned Scarborough and Middlesbrough duties. What would then replace them here?

Having promised the 68`s and mk 5`s to Scarborough and Middlesbrough to remove some (or all ) from one of those routs not long after their introduction might be tricky from the PR point of view ?

 

[ABB125]

Having promised the 68`s and mk 5`s to Scarborough and Middlesbrough to remove some (or all ) from one of those routs not long after their introduction might be tricky from the PR point of view ?

Maybe, but I suppose it depends on the quality of the replacements

 

[JonathanH]

Having promised the 68`s and mk 5`s to Scarborough and Middlesbrough to remove some (or all ) from one of those routs not long after their introduction might be tricky from the PR point of view ?

If the additional 185s stay, 68+Mk5 need never be introduced on the Manchester Airport to Middlesbrough route with 6-185 operating it instead once they aren't needed on the other routes.

Liverpool to Scarborough is a 7 train cycle
Manchester Airport to Redcar is a 7 train cycle
Liverpool to Nottingham looks like a 6 train cycle

Whatever happens 185s are needed on at least two of the routes.

 

[bunnahabhain]

TheBigD have you heard anything about evening services? The 20:52 on a Sunday night from Norwich stands out compared to the rest of the week at 18:57. Any news on whether the 20:52 would operate Monday to Saturday as well?

I believe at a 2052 from Norwich is a franchise requirement, it wouldn't surprise me if a 1952 from Norwich were added in to replace the 2102 from Spalding, and a 1934 from Nottingham were added in just to fill a gap.

 

[Killingworth]

I had a flick through RAIL yesterday in a shop, and apparently (according to someone from EMR) there are three options for the split:

• Transfer to TPE (preferred). This would probably be run by class 185s, with TPE taking back the 22 they are sending off lease, or class 68s and Mk 5s
• Transfer to Northern
• Don't split

Yes I am aware of the reputation of RAIL, but this information supposedly came from an official source, so is likely to be accurate.

If TPE run it with class 68s, presumably these would be transferred from their currently planned Scarborough and Middlesbrough duties. What would then replace them here?

As I explained in post 419 and has been the basic publicly known position for the last 2 or 3 years. EMR, TPE and Northern must be hoping the DfT can make a decision as to date of the change and operator so they can plan.

 

[Jozhua]

What is likely, 158's to stay or 185's to come?

I bet it's very dependent on which operator takes the route. Personally, I prefer 158's as they have more seats, better toilets, unit interconnect and end doors which does make riding onboard more comfortable, even if it is a squash at one or two stations!
Then operationally, the lighter 158's can take advantage of more speed differentials. Honestly, if you didn't see the train from the outside, they're not awfully far off a proper 'IC' experience. Definitely think 6 car 158's would be perfect. 6 car 185's would be fine capacity-wise, with a bit of room for growth, but no carriage interconnect, difficult toilet situation and two seperate first class sections for a route that doesn't really need it definitely mark it down in my eyes...

My main concern with the handover is in relation to staffing, EMT and EMR (so far) have always done a good job of making sure the trains are rarely cancelled due to staff not being in the appropriate locations. Obviously, the infrastructure often leads to delays, but the trains are not cancelled on the frequent basis often seen with Northern and TPE.

 

[Trainfan344]

Best option would be not to split the service IMO with the East Mids franchise keeping it based out of Nottingham... But that sounds sensible.

 

[Class 170101]

Best option would be not to split the service IMO with the East Mids franchise keeping it based out of Nottingham... But that sounds sensible.

Would have been transfer it to XC in my opinion. But everyone has different ideas and thoughts.

 

[dk1]

Would have been transfer it to XC in my opinion. But everyone has different ideas and thoughts.

But XC routes had to be centred on Birmingham.

 

[tbtc]

My main concern with the handover is in relation to staffing, EMT and EMR (so far) have always done a good job of making sure the trains are rarely cancelled due to staff not being in the appropriate locations. Obviously, the infrastructure often leads to delays, but the trains are not cancelled on the frequent basis often seen with Northern and TPE.

If the plan were to be TPE running a half hourly Liverpool - Warrington - Stockport - Sheffield service (extending hourly to Cleethorpes and hourly to Nottingham - doubled up 185s on most services) then that should make it easier to resource things and be resilient when things go wrong - the problem with EMR (or XC) running the service through to Liverpool is that there's not much of a "Plan B" when things go wrong (miss your slot at Stockport and you'll be stuck behind the Oxford Road stopper all the way to Liverpool, so by the time you arrive at Lime Street you've missed your eastbound slot - plus staff are meant to have their break on Merseyside).

Otherwise, with no operational base anywhere near the western end of the route, there's not much that a control room at Nottingham can do when things go bad on the far side of the Pennines.

 

[Class 170101]

Otherwise, with no operational base anywhere near the western end of the route, there's not much that a control room at Nottingham can do when things go bad on the far side of the Pennines.

Which of course Central Trains did at Liverpool. (Did they have one at Manchester as well?)

In todays world XC would have a base at Manchester.

 

[Jozhua]

If the plan were to be TPE running a half hourly Liverpool - Warrington - Stockport - Sheffield service (extending hourly to Cleethorpes and hourly to Nottingham - doubled up 185s on most services) then that should make it easier to resource things and be resilient when things go wrong - the problem with EMR (or XC) running the service through to Liverpool is that there's not much of a "Plan B" when things go wrong (miss your slot at Stockport and you'll be stuck behind the Oxford Road stopper all the way to Liverpool, so by the time you arrive at Lime Street you've missed your eastbound slot - plus staff are meant to have their break on Merseyside).

Otherwise, with no operational base anywhere near the western end of the route, there's not much that a control room at Nottingham can do when things go bad on the far side of the Pennines.

In reality though, despite the often horrific delays along Castlefield, the amount of cancellations on Liverpool - Norwich is significantly less than what we see on Transpennine Express and Northern. The scheduling for staff is probably just more robust and contains more leeway for things to go wrong, unlike Northern and TPE who seem to be holding it all together on a shoestring.

Despite capacity issues overall on the Hope Valley, I think EMT and now EMR have been running a decent service.

 

[LowLevel]

Which of course Central Trains did at Liverpool. (Did they have one at Manchester as well?)

In todays world XC would have a base at Manchester.

Central never had a depot at Liverpool. Towards the end of the franchise in 2005 or so if not later they opened one at Crewe. Before that Liverpool trains from Birmingham were worked originally by Birmingham New Street, then Wolverhampton as well when that appeared, with Leicester going there too (but only via Stafford not Sheffield) for a short time between that depot opening and Crewe depot opening. Crewe worked to Derby via Stoke but not Liverpool - Nottingham.

Regional Railways cost cutting measures centralised the Liverpool - Nottingham work at Nottingham depot.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would have been transfer it to XC in my opinion. But everyone has different ideas and thoughts.

It's similar to XC-lite, but those services shouldn't be with XC either. They are regional routes attached together primarily for operational convenience, not InterCity services.

 

[swt_passenger]

It's similar to XC-lite, but those services shouldn't be with XC either. They are regional routes attached together primarily for operational convenience, not InterCity services.

...and XC needs to maintain focus on the core business of main long distance routes across New St - another separate hub at Manchester is far more likely to make things worse, not better.

 

[driver_m]

Which of course Central Trains did at Liverpool. (Did they have one at Manchester as well?)

In todays world XC would have a base at Manchester.

as @LowLevel has already said. Central never had depots at Liverpool or Manchester. XC do have a Depot at Manchester as well and always have. It’s not a brilliant strategy having a Depot at Crewe as it encourages the TOC to turn stuff round short of terminating station and Liverpool used to do badly out of this and still does on LNR services. Often being turned at LSP or Runcorn even. Should ideally always have hot spare stock somewhere nearby and staff at the terminating point.

 

[NoOnesFool]

Best option would be not to split the service IMO with the East Mids franchise keeping it based out of Nottingham... But that sounds sensible.

I agree. I have encountered many people who travel from West of Sheffield to East of Nottingham. I think the main issue is delays around Manchester and trying not to pass those issues on to the ECML. If there was something to improve the bottleneck around Castlefield, then it would make a big difference.

 

[Ianno87]

I agree. I have encountered many people who travel from West of Sheffield to East of Nottingham. I think the main issue is delays around Manchester and trying not to pass those issues on to the ECML. If there was something to improve the bottleneck around Castlefield, then it would make a big difference.

This is the issue when you say "many" people (a very subjective word) travelling West of Sheffield to East of Nottingham.

Very,very many more do not cross-Nottingham at all (e.g. Nottingham-Liverpool, Sheffield-Manchester, Norwich-Peterborough, etc.)

So it's the perverse situation where the service and its operation is planned around the convenience of the minority, to the detriment of the needs of the majority. Tail wagging the dog.

As outlined by tbtc above, splitting the service focuses resources on the service's core market (which is not cross-Nottingham journeys), and the operational focus on getting the Castlefield corridor right.

I'm not counting on a capacity solution for Castlefield any time soon...

 

[NoOnesFool]

This is the issue when you say "many" people (a very subjective word) travelling West of Sheffield to East of Nottingham.

Very,very many more do not cross-Nottingham at all (e.g. Nottingham-Liverpool, Sheffield-Manchester, Norwich-Peterborough, etc.)

So it's the perverse situation where the service and its operation is planned around the convenience of the minority, to the detriment of the needs of the majority. Tail wagging the dog.

As outlined by tbtc above, splitting the service focuses resources on the service's core market (which is not cross-Nottingham journeys), and the operational focus on getting the Castlefield corridor right.

I'm not counting on a capacity solution for Castlefield any time soon...

The same argument could be made about any cross-country route, yet I don't forsee any plans to trim the Plymouth-Dundee down to being a Bristol-Newcastle service (bearing in mind how often those service can be delayed and how many mainline paths they cross).

 

[VT 390]

The same argument could be made about any cross-country route, yet I don't forsee any plans to trim the Plymouth-Dundee down to being a Bristol-Newcastle service (bearing in mind how often those service can be delayed and how many mainline paths they cross).

I think the difference is between routes like Plymouth to Dundee and Liverpool to Norwich is that a lot more people will be doing longer journeys on one such as Plymouth to Birmingham or Bristol to Leeds (from what I have seen on seat reservations) than the other and the longer XC routes are usually the quickest route where as Liverpool to Norwich most of the cross Nottingham journeys can be done quicker by going an alternative route.