Liverpool Norwich service to be split at Nottingham

[Class 170101]

If the will was there, I’d imagine it’d already have been done.

Possibly although on the current franchise map the whole route is not covered by one franchise. If TPE were to take over Liverpool to Nottingham then it would be. However I have said this before splitting the network up arbitially means certain routes under BR happened that couldn't happen / difficult to / impossible to implement now.

 

[Tomnick]

Possibly although on the current franchise map the whole route is not covered by one franchise. If TPE were to take over Liverpool to Nottingham then it would be. However I have said this before splitting the network up arbitially means certain routes under BR happened that couldn't happen / difficult to / impossible to implement now.

Indeed not, but only for the sake of about ten miles of route knowledge! If it transfers to TPE, then it certainly opens up that possibility, but it doesn't need to transfer for it to happen. There's hardly a comprehensive overnight service even west of Sheffield as things stand!

 

[Jozhua]

Any idea when the announcement will be made for the route split?

I'm guessing they won't be using the 170's EMR are bringing in, so it must be before then right?

 

[edwin_m]

Any idea when the announcement will be made for the route split?

I'm guessing they won't be using the 170's EMR are bringing in, so it must be before then right?

I imagine EMR will hang on to enough 158s alongside the 170s until the transfer takes place.

 

[bunnahabhain]

Any idea when the announcement will be made for the route split?

I'm guessing they won't be using the 170's EMR are bringing in, so it must be before then right?

The route has been risk assessed for running up to 5 cars with 170s and mixed 170/15x in the past few months so the Liverpool route may well see 170s reintroduced.

 

[edwin_m]

The route has been risk assessed for running up to 5 cars with 170s and mixed 170/15x in the past few months so the Liverpool route may well see 170s reintroduced.

I imagine EMR won't have enough 170s to cover this route alongside all their others, especially as it isn't part of the long-term plan. However it's possible a 170 could find itself running this service during the transition period between the 170s arriving at EMR and the Liverpool route going to another operator.

 

[Jozhua]

The route has been risk assessed for running up to 5 cars with 170s and mixed 170/15x in the past few months so the Liverpool route may well see 170s reintroduced.

Got to say, 5 car 170 formations would probably be perfect for the route. That would keep capacity the same, if not increase it a little bit, but also massively reduce dwells/crush at Piccadilly. 5 cars could be easily justified with current loadings, so in a couple of years, I can definitely see their use!

Are the 170's light enough to use speed differentials?

 

[Failed Unit]

Got to say, 5 car 170 formations would probably be perfect for the route. That would keep capacity the same, if not increase it a little bit, but also massively reduce dwells/crush at Piccadilly. 5 cars could be easily justified with current loadings, so in a couple of years, I can definitely see their use!

Are the 170's light enough to use speed differentials?

yes. Not new either central trains used to run 5 car formations to Liverpool in the past. Either 2x 170 or 170 + 15x

 

[DDB]

I would assume that EMR would want to separate out the service including both staff and rolling stuck diagrams in their next timetable recast so when it leaves, it does not disrupt anything else. I'd be surprised to see the 170s on it except during disruption.

 

[LowLevel]

I would assume that EMR would want to separate out the service including both staff and rolling stuck diagrams in their next timetable recast so when it leaves, it does not disrupt anything else. I'd be surprised to see the 170s on it except during disruption.

As I understand it it is entirely likely when the first 5 arrive that they will be used on Liverpool services as on the correct diagrams they can free up 2 other 15x units (some are suited for a 3 car train).

 

[Mugby]

Apologies if it's already been stated but when are they scheduled to arrive?

 

[LowLevel]

Apologies if it's already been stated but when are they scheduled to arrive?

Spring through to May. 1 first for training and then the rest from ScotRail. Other sets from elsewhere schedule to be confirmed.

 

[Jozhua]

yes. Not new either central trains used to run 5 car formations to Liverpool in the past. Either 2x 170 or 170 + 15x

Brilliant, that's fantastic.

As I understand it it is entirely likely when the first 5 arrive that they will be used on Liverpool services as on the correct diagrams they can free up 2 other 15x units (some are suited for a 3 car train).

I highly doubt a 3 car 170 would be suitable to shove on an all-day diagram from Liverpool - Norwich, then there's the fact that the train splits at Nottingham. Perhaps a 3 car 170 plus two car 15X, that'd offer a bit more capacity.

 

[LowLevel]

Brilliant, that's fantastic.



I highly doubt a 3 car 170 would be suitable to shove on an all-day diagram from Liverpool - Norwich, then there's the fact that the train splits at Nottingham. Perhaps a 3 car 170 plus two car 15X, that'd offer a bit more capacity.

Obviously your expertise is greater than mine, I only spend my life working the trains, what do I know

The plan when they were to arrive earlier was to have them do just that to free up units for 153 withdrawal but the issues at ScotRail have put paid to that.

A 3 car 170 would for example manage on the diagram that does the 0520 Nottingham - Liverpool/0852 Liverpool - Norwich/1457 Norwich to Liverpool/2137 Liverpool to Nottingham and provide a helpful uplift in capacity on the 1457 service which gets busy in parts.

Same for the 0757 from Norwich/1352 from Liverpool and so on, bar weekends when it's very busy.

 

[Jozhua]

Obviously your expertise is greater than mine, I only spend my life working the trains, what do I know

The plan when they were to arrive earlier was to have them do just that to free up units for 153 withdrawal but the issues at ScotRail have put paid to that.

A 3 car 170 would for example manage on the diagram that does the 0520 Nottingham - Liverpool/0852 Liverpool - Norwich/1457 Norwich to Liverpool/2137 Liverpool to Nottingham and provide a helpful uplift in capacity on the 1457 service which gets busy in parts.

Same for the 0757 from Norwich/1352 from Liverpool and so on, bar weekends when it's very busy.

Fair enough, every time I go from Manchester to Chesterfield it is overcrowded though. You can kind of understand my concern with any potential reduction in capacity!

 

[LowLevel]

Fair enough, every time I go from Manchester to Chesterfield it is overcrowded though. You can kind of understand my concern with any potential reduction in capacity!

It does involve some careful consideration of which trains you can muck about with. However it can't be worse than the current 158 short forming issues.

Peak trains are full and standing with 4 coaches, I accept. Some less popular trains would manage comfortably with 3. The key is picking the diagrams which are consistent.

 

[Killingworth]

It does involve some careful consideration of which trains you can muck about with. However it can't be worse than the current 158 short forming issues.

Peak trains are full and standing with 4 coaches, I accept. Some less popular trains would manage comfortably with 3. The key is picking the diagrams which are consistent.

Of course overcrowding results from a variety of factors, short forming by EMR being only one. Today TPE have had troubles east of Sheffield so at least 3 return services have been cancelled to the Airport. A zero formed 6 coach TPE will have put considerable strain on EMR and Northern services!

I'd agree that many EMR services could be operated by a 3 car 185 when/if that happens. 6 cars would be excessive for many, maybe most, except to cover one off issues like today.

 

[Jozhua]

Of course overcrowding results from a variety of factors, short forming by EMR being only one. Today TPE have had troubles east of Sheffield so at least 3 return services have been cancelled to the Airport. A zero formed 6 coach TPE will have put considerable strain on EMR and Northern services!

I'd agree that many EMR services could be operated by a 3 car 185 when/if that happens. 6 cars would be excessive for many, maybe most, except to cover one off issues like today.

I highly doubt a 3 car 185 would be enough unless you wanted to be filling every single seat throughout the day with no room to spare or for expansion. With the current reservations mess, many stand despite seats being available.

Really, the best solution would be to route the current train through Derby/Leicester and have an extra express that skips Sheffield and goes direct to Nottingham, or visa versa. Travel times between the Nottingham/Derby/Leicester area to Manchester/Liverpool are a bit long, considering how much distance is actually covered.

 

[Killingworth]

I highly doubt a 3 car 185 would be enough unless you wanted to be filling every single seat throughout the day with no room to spare or for expansion. With the current reservations mess, many stand despite seats being available.

Really, the best solution would be to route the current train through Derby/Leicester and have an extra express that skips Sheffield and goes direct to Nottingham, or visa versa. Travel times between the Nottingham/Derby/Leicester area to Manchester/Liverpool are a bit long, considering how much distance is actually covered.

I'd opt for a walk through 5 coach unit if they're available, for now. However, passenger numbers are being restricted due to current capacity issues at peak times on all 3 Hope Valley operators. Make them all run to time, fully formed without cancellations, and within 5 years more capacity will be being demanded. A lot more in 10 years. There's significant pent up demand.

At peak times the roads into Sheffield and around Manchester are gridlocked and weather adds an extra barrier. A friend and I opted not to use an EMR service from Dore on Monday and took the car rather than risking a 10 minute connection time at Piccadilly. We were half right. The EMR service was 9 minutes late so we'd have missed the connection. However, Manchester motorway delays meant we were 20 minutes late by car!

 

[Jozhua]

I'd opt for a walk through 5 coach unit if they're available, for now. However, passenger numbers are being restricted due to current capacity issues at peak times on all 3 Hope Valley operators. Make them all run to time, fully formed without cancellations, and within 5 years more capacity will be being demanded. A lot more in 10 years. There's significant pent up demand.

At peak times the roads into Sheffield and around Manchester are gridlocked and weather adds an extra barrier. A friend and I opted not to use an EMR service from Dore on Monday and took the car rather than risking a 10 minute connection time at Piccadilly. We were half right. The EMR service was 9 minutes late so we'd have missed the connection. However, Manchester motorway delays meant we were 20 minutes late by car!

Yes, honestly as time goes on we see more that these connections are in dire need of investment. I'm concerned that the government will connect Manchester - Leeds and feel it's a job well done and forget about the South Transpennine route. Obviously the North Transpennine also needs it, but Hope Valley is probably in even more dire need of investment. More long term planning also needs to take place, it feels like improvements are only considered 10 years after they should have happened and continue to get delayed further. I'm definitely part of the pent-up demand, I don't make the trips as frequently as I'd like due to the length and stress of the trip!

For now, longer trains will help and hopefully the split at Nottingham will allow both services to be more robust and cause less knock on delays.
Today I noticed that my EMR getting delayed through Castlefield subsequently delayed both a Cross-Country and East Midlands Railway service through Chesterfield by about 10 minutes and 15 minutes respectively.

 

[edwin_m]

It does involve some careful consideration of which trains you can muck about with. However it can't be worse than the current 158 short forming issues.

Including making sure that there is a strengthening unit available in Nottingham for those services that need one, even if the service the previous hour that it currently comes off is a 3-car so doesn't detach. I suspect this means the released strengthening units will just end up sitting in the depot for a couple of hours, because they won't have time to do anything else before they are next needed.

 

[LowLevel]

Well interestingly the supplementary document to the track access request for December 2020 seems to imply that the majority of Liverpool/Norwich through services terminate at Manchester Piccadilly with a reduced service to Liverpool. Might be a mistake or I've misread it

 

[tbtc]

Really, the best solution would be to route the current train through Derby/Leicester and have an extra express that skips Sheffield and goes direct to Nottingham, or visa versa

This is the problem though - there's no simple way to tick all of the East Midland boxes without a tediously slow train - skipping Sheffield but then diverting via Derby won't give much of a time saving to Nottingham passengers. And then you've got four services per hour at the moment from Chesterfield to Derby, so is there scope for another (on top of the Matlock stopper at the southern end plus any freight)?

Or are you suggesting diverting the Liverpool service via Derby and Leicester (and presumably Melton Mowbray to Peterborough, thus removing many of the services from Sheffield to Nottingham and Nottingham to Grantham/ Peterborough/ East Anglia)?

I'm not against improvements but any tweaks to improve the longer distance journey times come at the cost of existing frequencies (i.e. taking the Liverpool - Nottingham service away from Sheffield will save five/ten minutes for longer distance passengers, but at the cost of severe cuts to the frequency of services from Manchester to Sheffield and from Sheffield to Nottingham).

I'm concerned that the government will connect Manchester - Leeds and feel it's a job well done and forget about the South Transpennine route. Obviously the North Transpennine also needs it, but Hope Valley is probably in even more dire need of investment

I think that is Government policy - tick the box of "investing in t'North" by improving the Manchester - Leeds link (alongside the M62) and leave Manchester - Sheffield to a single carriageway road and sections of single track railway (at both Hazel Grove and Dore).

I don't think Manchester - Leeds passengers (or motorists) realise how bad the Hope Valley line (or A628/ A57) is - we've driven back from Greater Manchester via the M62/ M1 a few times because of the bad roads (congestion around Glossop/ Mottram, weather making the Snake/Woodhead dangerous to drive).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well interestingly the supplementary document to the track access request for December 2020 seems to imply that the majority of Liverpool/Norwich through services terminate at Manchester Piccadilly with a reduced service to Liverpool. Might be a mistake or I've misread it

Well, that's unexpected. Could it be to remove an end-doored train from Castlefield?

 

[cle]

Well, that's unexpected. Could it be to remove an end-doored train from Castlefield?

More reliable also. Hoping that an additional Castlefield train would run through to CLC/Liverpool, not that important from where. But I guess not Stockport or Airport due to paths, so maybe Guide Bridge direction?

 

[Bletchleyite]

More reliable also. Hoping that an additional Castlefield train would run through to CLC/Liverpool, not that important from where. But I guess not Stockport or Airport due to paths, so maybe Guide Bridge direction?

That would have to cross the formation, though, and so would rather negate the (weak) point of the Ordsall Chord.

That said, isn't there some sort of plan that the Hope Valley stopper will run via Hazel Grove and Stockport, being replaced with the Marples running only to Chinley? If this happened, that would be an ideal one to run through to Liverpool and would maintain the direct connection with Sheffield (and add one with some popular destinations for a weekend bimble).

 

[LowLevel]

The implication appears to be 4 trains per day through to Liverpool and the rest to Man Picc.

 

[Confused52]

The implication appears to be 4 trains per day through to Liverpool and the rest to Man Picc.

Indeed it does except that the Via column does not have what would be a necessary note against Warrington Central or it should have been deleted. The unreliability of this service group has caused the loss of a stop at Warrington West and I suppose that this would prevent that problem by giving a much longer turn round time, surely much too long in fact. in the main shed at Piccadilly. Would the resulting diagrams make any sense. Oh and where would Northern get the stock and crew from to put in a Piccadilly to Lime St shuttle to fill the gap?!!

Edit: Looking at form P it suggest that there will be changes as follows:

• An existing Nottingham to Norwich service extended to start back at Sheffield in the morning to provide greater connectivity and maintain peak commuting opportunities into Nottingham;


• Two Norwich to Nottingham services extended to Sheffield in the evening to provide greater regional connectivity;

• An additional late evening service between Manchester and Nottingham;

• An additional late evening service between Norwich and Nottingham;

• An additional late evening service between Nottingham and Boston;

• An additional early morning service between Grantham and Nottingham, and evening service between Nottingham and Grantham, to improve local commuting opportunities;

So not a wholesale change just poor application writing perhaps!

 

[91108]

Oh and where would Northern get the stock and crew from to put in a Piccadilly to Lime St shuttle to fill the gap?!!

Presumably from the same magical place that they or TPE will get the stock and crew from to do the Lime St to Nottingham shuttle proposed for 2021, when EMR lose the route..

 

[Ianno87]

Indeed it does except that the Via column does not have what would be a necessary note against Warrington Central or it should have been deleted. The unreliability of this service group has caused the loss of a stop at Warrington West and I suppose that this would prevent that problem by giving a much longer turn round time, surely much too long in fact. in the main shed at Piccadilly. Would the resulting diagrams make any sense. Oh and where would Northern get the stock and crew from to put in a Piccadilly to Lime St shuttle to fill the gap?!!

It would be a 6 or 66 minute turnround (or thereabouts) *unless* by not having to be pathed across the throat of Piccadilly they can get a much cleaner run into the main shed, buy a few minutes each way and get a 10-15 minute turnround time or something.

Presumably from the same magical place that they or TPE will get the stock and crew from to do the Lime St to Nottingham shuttle proposed for 2021, when EMR lose the route..

It could be "Phase 1" of splitting the service.