Liverpool Norwich service to be split at Nottingham

[Bovverboy]

Would it be a better option to permanently cut back the route to Manchester Piccadilly, then keep Norwich to Manchester with EMR, and not split the route at Nottingham?
If the problems with time keeping are all mainly in the Castlefield and Allerton areas plus getting from Piccadilly platforms 13/14 to Stockport, any new Nottingham to Liverpool Service, whoever runs it, is going to suffer the same delays. True, it won’t result in knock on poor time keeping miles away east of Nottingham but it will still mean delays between Manchester, Sheffield and Nottingham and probably regular missed connections at Nottingham because the EMR train to Norwich will not be held.

I can assure you that delays to the EMR Norwich - Liverpool service are anything but confined to the Stockport - Liverpool section. The Oxford Road to Liverpool stoppers, which are generally scheduled to depart Oxford Road four minutes after the EMR, are regularly sent on ahead and then either looped at Glazebrook or allowed to continue all the way to Liverpool.
EMR arrivals at Stockport ex-Nottingham/Norwich on Friday just gone (6/12/19) - which doesn't appear to have been a particularly bad day - were as follows.
3L, 4L, 3L, 3L, 3L, 11L, 11L, 8L, 4L, 4L, 11L, 8L, 13L, 11L.
Delays in the Slade Lane area seem to be more imagined than real, and I don't mind saying that I personally have never been seriously delayed there. Most of the above trains actually caught time up between Stockport and Picc, and only one lost it - three minutes.
Of the trains which were 10+ late at Stockport, the dominant reason was being stuck behind a freight or late-running Sheffield - Picc stopper, on the Hope Valley section.
Of the eastbound services, only one was significantly delayed on the Castlefield - Picc section, partly through a backlog of late-running trains at Castlefield, and partly waiting for the 1650 Picc - Llandudno to clear P13 at Picc - yes P13, I don't know for sure why it didn't use P14.
Oxford Road to Liverpool stoppers were generally delayed by the EMR arrivals, but none were despatched out of sequence. As I say, it wasn't a particularly bad day.

 

[Grumpy Git]

The route is hopelessly short of loops to help rectify out of sequence/good trains.

 

[Meerkat]

I was not referring to commuters. Do you have any experience of relying on a "northern" train service?

Neither was I? How do you think rail travellers from South of London (and much of The London Suburbs) get to the North or East Anglia? We lug our bags into London, across the Underground, and onto Trains. And the walks from 12 coach trains to the underground can be significant. And as for doing it in the peaks.....

 

[frodshamfella]

........... and it's not always because of the physical upheaval of changing, it's the thought the train might be late and the connection missed, (or the connection being cancelled).

Yes there is that too, and for good reason !

 

[frodshamfella]

Why are northerners so averse to changing trains? At least they don’t have to get across London on the underground like a most of the south east does!!

I dont think we are averse , but the reality is the services available are poor frequently.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I dont think we are averse , but the reality is the services available are poor frequently.

I think the Swiss model would work well in Northernland - and that includes changes - but it would require the requisite infrastructure improvements, most specifically P15/16, and possibly 17/18 too (as the concept requires trains to hang around at major stations for both-ways interchange).

Reliable connections and frequent connections both work well. Once an hour with poor timekeeping = a lot of standing around = people drive instead. Hourly connecting services only work with a proper planned Takt and enough slack for things to be near 100% punctual.

 

[frodshamfella]

Neither was I? How do you think rail travellers from South of London (and much of The London Suburbs) get to the North or East Anglia? We lug our bags into London, across the Underground, and onto Trains. And the walks from 12 coach trains to the underground can be significant. And as for doing it in the peaks.....

Oh to have 12 coaches ! 6 would be nice.

 

[Bevan Price]

Possibly. in the peak there appear to now be a few 6-car 195s on Liverpool services, and they're far from full. As long as Northern could guarantee that all MAN -> LIV services would be 5 or 6 cars, it would probably improve perfomance quite a bit.

Ultimately, however, I'd still be in favour of transferring the route to TPE rather than keeping it with EMR. The reason is that, with so many 185s set to be released over the coming year, they have a better chance of not short-forming the service. Shortforming is a massive problem between MAN and SHF, but once there are enough 185s for Cleethorpes and Nottingham services to both always be 6-car, this should be less of a problem.

But does anyone here trust TPE to ensure that they always use 6-car 185s on Liverpool/Manchester - Nottingham. (Excluding any rare train failure occurrences, when a short formation is inevitable)

Personally, I now think that if they really insist on splitting services at Nottingham, the best option would be for EM to retain the Nottingham - Liverpool part, and for Greater Anglia to take over the Nottingham - Norwich part.

 

[py_megapixel]

But does anyone here trust TPE to ensure that they always use 6-car 185s on Liverpool/Manchester - Nottingham. (Excluding any rare train failure occurrences, when a short formation is inevitable)

No, but I trust EM even less. EM 158s have to be swapped around onto lots of routes. Once the Nova program is complete the 185s will only be in use for South TPE services. Plus, there is less capacity on a double 158 than a double 185. And given the frequency of shortforming of the current Norwich services, I doubt there is enough stock to run triple 158s.

What reason would there be to run with 3 cars when there is an abundance of rolling stock and they can coupled to make 6?

 

[Killingworth]

Why are northerners so averse to changing trains? At least they don’t have to get across London on the underground like a most of the south east does!!

My grandsons in Essex travel to school every day by using two trains, changing at Shenfield. They rarely have issues with late running trains. Shenfield is currently showing at 290th out of 2619 stations in the UK for punctuality.

Sheffield station comes at 2448th in that league table. My own station is even worse, filling 2597th place.

Of course all league tables include top and bottom performers, but who would rely on catching a connection at Sheffield if they had the option of a through service?

The Liverpool - Norwich services were badly hit yesterday evening when TPE cancelled 3 of theirs between Manchester and Sheffield and Northern added a cancellation in the same period. Southern rail users would probably be making a fuss. In the North we mostly shrug our shoulders and accept it, that's the way it is.

So we get out the car and forget the railway. Which is why only 1% of journeys, at most, in the North are made by rail.

 

[Camden]

This is the thing. A lot of people need this train, particularly betweeen South Parkway and Warrington. Losing the Scarborough service only increased that need and the Northern service to Manchester Aiport is regularly cancelled and whenever there's a line issue they pretty much stop running that service altogether. The only other train is the CLC stopper and that's a train packed out, particularly in the peaks, for the smaller stations commuting/visiting to Liverpool or Manchester. You can't throw all the South Liverpool/Widnes/Warrington commuters on that as well.

Platform 14 at Piccadilly is always packed to the rafters, imagine it without this service. Losing this train without a replacement is not feasible and if it's replaced then it's a train still going through Deansgate anyway.

They need to re-think the Ordsall Chord until they can get platform 15 and 16 built.

It's disgusting. These decisions are being continuously made as if Liverpool doesn't even exist.

It's not some small or mid-size backwater on the east coast ffs, it's the country's 4th biggest metro!

I always suspected the pre-cooked up deal to break the east mids route would be bad news for Liverpool, but I didn't expect this and so soon. I note also the alarming frequency that Northern short form the TPE replacement on that line. Previously served by 6 carriages, sometimes I'm told that a mere 2 carriages turns up!

So, Manchester gets a pointless trophy chord, with which to do nothing else than strangle its neighbour!

I would strongly recommend you email your metro mayor with the details, setting out clearly the issues. People need to start getting their backsides kicked before they do too much damage to undo.

 

[Killingworth]

Of the trains which were 10+ late at Stockport, the dominant reason was being stuck behind a freight or late-running Sheffield - Picc stopper, on the Hope Valley section.

The lack of loops and removal of multiple tracks has contributed to this. Chinley once had 5 platforms and now has two. At the other end of the Dore & Chinley Railway Dore had 4 platforms and now has one.

Passengers can't help noticing long container freights trailing through Piccadilly, but heavy loads of limestone and cement leaving the Peak District from Buxton and Hope also occupies track space, especially when slowly crossing between tracks as happens at Dore West, Dore South, Earles and at Chinley.

The westbound Northern services are often late. Many are late arriving in Sheffield having been delayed coming East. The crews are generally very good at cutting turnaround times to the minimum. They get frustrated when they're ready to go on time at xx.14, only to be held for the late running xx.11 TPE Cleethorpes-Manchester Airport. It happens more often than not. Worse, some stoppers are further held in the Heeley loop to allow that late running TPE, or a MML or XC to have preference. It may then race up to Dore Station Junction - only to be held again because northbound services are given preference into Sheffield. I've known the stopper take over 20 minutes to complete the 4 miles into Dore & Totley. So the Norwich - Liverpool catches up, assuming it's on time.

Earles Sidings can be used as a passing loop, and have been when steam specials pull in there, but there are no plans for that to be regularised for normal passenger workings.

When the Hope Valley Capacity Improvement Scheme is completed the single section through Dore Station will be doubled, but wouldn't help much in the situation described above. There was an option to make it bi-directional through the station but that seems to be being dropped. That would allow a stopping service to get out of Sheffield and across the nortbound MML to Dore to be overtaken there by the late running TPE. Apparently the benefits of improved flexibility and resilience are outweighed by the cost.

And that's repeated across the country, at many pinch points there are small changes that might save a delay here and a delay there. But another point to fail, another circuit to wire up, and possibly a speed restriction to add in.

Nothing is simple on the railway.

 

[Bevan Price]

No, but I trust EM even less. EM 158s have to be swapped around onto lots of routes. Once the Nova program is complete the 185s will only be in use for South TPE services. Plus, there is less capacity on a double 158 than a double 185. And given the frequency of shortforming of the current Norwich services, I doubt there is enough stock to run triple 158s.

What reason would there be to run with 3 cars when there is an abundance of rolling stock and they can coupled to make 6?

The higher running costs for a start. 6 x 185 coaches will consume a lot more fuel than 4 x 158. And i suspect, higher track access charges, due to higher weight per coach.

 

[Killingworth]

The higher running costs for a start. 6 x 185 coaches will consume a lot more fuel than 4 x 158. And i suspect, higher track access charges, due to higher weight per coach.

Quite. Despite long repeated promises of 6 coach TPE South Pennine services there are suspicions that operating such long trains overstretches platform capacity in Manchester, and is excessive on most services at the Eastern end of the route. The closer it comes to stock being available the more the practicaliity comes into focus. Detaching half at Piccadilly adds that little extra complexity. Doing the same at Sheffield or Doncaster would be fraught with greater challenges, so dragging all 6 to Cleethorpes seems inevitable.

Multiples of 158s (or similar) in 2, 4 or 6 carriage walk-through formations would be much more practical.

 

[gazzaa2]

The Scarborough service (through Warrington) was replaced by a Northern service that serves the same intermediate stops from Liverpool to Manchester though?

Yes but that Northern Airport service is extremely unreliable and frequently cancelled at the best of times and when it does show up it's often 2 cars. With any kind of line problem they pretty much stop running them. That train was to replace Scarborough one on that line (a bad replacement). They can't take this off us as well without running another service on the CLC.

And Liverpool still has a Scarborough service (diverted via Chat Moss).

So the only people really inconvenienced are people doing through journeys like Warrington to Scarborough which can't be many people?

(Warrington still has a through service to Leeds)

Not just Warrington but Widnes and south Liverpool. These trains are always busy and unbearably packed between Liverpool-Manchester when 2 cars and pretty much full at 4 cars (the Northern stopper is the same). In the peaks they're packed to the rafters.

It's disgusting. These decisions are being continuously made as if Liverpool doesn't even exist.

It's not some small or mid-size backwater on the east coast ffs, it's the country's 4th biggest metro!

I always suspected the pre-cooked up deal to break the east mids route would be bad news for Liverpool, but I didn't expect this and so soon. I note also the alarming frequency that Northern short form the TPE replacement on that line. Previously served by 6 carriages, sometimes I'm told that a mere 2 carriages turns up!

So, Manchester gets a pointless trophy chord, with which to do nothing else than strangle its neighbour!

I would strongly recommend you email your metro mayor with the details, setting out clearly the issues. People need to start getting their backsides kicked before they do too much damage to undo.

Yeah, it's frustrating to say the least. Spend time at Lime Street on a Friday or a Saturday in particular and every train that pulls up (obviously it's the last stop) is absolutely packed to the rafters with visitors. It's a major city and a very popular one but politically treated like it doesn't exist.

And that Airport service I got on a Saturday evening the other week from Warrington turned up with 2 cars and was ridiculously overcrowded. THe previous one had naturally been cancelled as well.

 

[tbtc]

Would it be a better option to permanently cut back the route to Manchester Piccadilly, then keep Norwich to Manchester with EMR, and not split the route at Nottingham?
If the problems with time keeping are all mainly in the Castlefield and Allerton areas plus getting from Piccadilly platforms 13/14 to Stockport, any new Nottingham to Liverpool Service, whoever runs it, is going to suffer the same delays. True, it won’t result in knock on poor time keeping miles away east of Nottingham but it will still mean delays between Manchester, Sheffield and Nottingham and probably regular missed connections at Nottingham because the EMR train to Norwich will not be held.

Interesting idea. I'm not sure.

Whilst I totally understand the reasons behind potentially terminating some of the services at Manchester (if this does turn out to be the case and not just the kind of speculation we get, like when not every single service has been uploaded into RTT and guesswork starts...), given that the line west of Piccadilly seems to be a big problem, I don't see the point in doing this *and* splitting the service at Nottingham. I could understand chopping it at Manchester in the first instance (i.e. Norwich - Manchester) but doing both seems a bit severe... rather than making one cut and seeing if it settles down (before considering a second cut?)

People who run the railways in situations like this don't understand that most of the travelling public do not want to change trains. Certainly my wife would never dream of taking a non-direct service anywhere with luggage. I know that may seem silly to people who travel regularly like myself, but that is the truth of the matter.

It is so, if you told the average person who was going from Liverpool to Nottingham your going to have to change at Piccadilly , they will drive, and surely this is not what idea is .

If I were travelling from Liverpool to Nottingham then I'd be put off by changing, yes. But then not a lot of people *do* travel from Liverpool to Nottingham each day (compared to the number who make journeys of up to an hour long to Manchester/ Sheffield/ Nottingham) - but se seem to be prioritising the handful of long distance passengers (and some civic price on Merseyside) ahead of regular everyday passengers.

(and, if direct services are so important then what about Cambridge passengers? Or Ipswich? Or Stansted? Or Blackpool? Or Cumbria? Or Manchester Airport? How many direct journey combinations do we cater to?)

Why are northerners so averse to changing trains? At least they don’t have to get across London on the underground like a most of the south east does!!

I don't know the answer, but I'd rather have the London version (than the messy Northern version, where the obsession with direct services mean some towns have terrible frequencies into the nearest big city because the mesh of long distance services mean long gaps - e.g. thirty minute waits to do a typical everyday journey from Halifax to Bradford/ Leeds - because The Powers That Be are more interested in the line having through trains to Chester/ York/ Blackpool etc)

 

[Statto]

Why are northerners so averse to changing trains? At least they don’t have to get across London on the underground like a most of the south east does!!

Because in Northern land you have 1 or 2 trains an hour, systems like the underground have 1 or 2 trains every couple of minutes that's a big difference, especially late running trains meaning you've missed a connection, then you might have up to an hour to wait for the next train in Northern areas, so preferable to have through trains if possible.

 

[Ianno87]

Liverpool to beyond Manchester is another one where I'd be interested to see some actual demand numbers - from casual observation of eastbound trains, there is a very hefty 'churn' of passengers through the Manchester stations, so I'm not convinced there's all *that* many Liverpool passengers left on after Manchester.

Remembering of course that journeys like Liverpool-Peterborough (via TPE/LNER changing at Leeds) are now faster, and if Crewe-Derby gets extended to Nottingham, Liverpool-Crewe-Nottingham becomes a relatively attractive option.

As a Cambridge resident, using the EMR service to get to Manchester is still where the journey time is relatively attractive (if still slower) than other route. Liverpool, the balance has tipped entirely and via London is unquestionably faster.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Because in Northern land you have 1 or 2 trains an hour, systems like the underground have 1 or 2 trains every couple of minutes that's a big difference, especially late running trains meaning you've missed a connection, then you might have up to an hour to wait for the next train in Northern areas, so preferable to have through trains if possible.

Precisely. Connections can be done well with low frequencies (see Germany, Switzerland etc) but they do have to be properly planned, coordinated and held in case of delay - Northern is none of those things. The infrastructure provides some limitations there but not in every case and it's still not done.

 

[ainsworth74]

Connections can be done well with low frequencies (see Germany, Switzerland etc) but they do have to be properly planned, coordinated and held in case of delay - Northern is none of those things.

It is, of course, easy to sling mud but it's not quite a simple in the real world. I have chatted with a member of Northern staff who has some involvement in decisions around holding connections and the first thing they said was that they need to know that there are actually passengers in need of the connection that needs to be held. They won't just hold a train on the off chance that someone is making the interchange! If they're told that x number of passengers require a connection onto a Northern service then it is much more likely to be held. But equally frequency or last train of the day to 'Station X' also matters. If there's another Northern service going to be along in half an hour then with the best will in the world they're not going to hold a train and delay all the passengers already on board whilst if it's the last train of the day then they're much more likely to hold a train.

By all means through mud if you want but don't just insult the intelligence and ability of those on the ground making the decisions and trying to manage the day to day running of the operation.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is, of course, easy to sling mud but it's not quite a simple in the real world

It is when you take the SBB/DB type approach - you hold it anyway on the assumption that there WILL be, because there always are, because the system is designed so that there are.

And you need that reliability to make it viable, too - no good if e.g. a parent with a pram can't fight through 4 coaches full and standing to ask the guard to hold the connection.

As a very minimum it has to be assumed that there are unless you KNOW there are not i.e. the guard can get through and ask every single passenger "Do you want the Ormskirk?" or something.

Edit: FWIW this is one positive that could be taken from Advance type ticketing - if they're booked on it odds on they're going to want it - but I bet that data is neither used nor available to be used in that manner even though it should be! Arguably this data plus data from passenger surveys could allow a very accurate decision to be made by an automated system (also based on what else might be delayed along the line) as to whether to hold or not, and to automatically notify people of alternatives when the decision is a no.

 

[frodshamfella]

Yes but that Northern Airport service is extremely unreliable and frequently cancelled at the best of times and when it does show up it's often 2 cars. With any kind of line problem they pretty much stop running them. That train was to replace Scarborough one on that line (a bad replacement). They can't take this off us as well without running another service on the CLC.



Not just Warrington but Widnes and south Liverpool. These trains are always busy and unbearably packed between Liverpool-Manchester when 2 cars and pretty much full at 4 cars (the Northern stopper is the same). In the peaks they're packed to the rafters.




Yeah, it's frustrating to say the least. Spend time at Lime Street on a Friday or a Saturday in particular and every train that pulls up (obviously it's the last stop) is absolutely packed to the rafters with visitors. It's a major city and a very popular one but politically treated like it doesn't exist.

And that Airport service I got on a Saturday evening the other week from Warrington turned up with 2 cars and was ridiculously overcrowded. THe previous one had naturally been cancelled as well.

There is also the problem with LNWR services, often cancelled / late / turned back at South Pkwy because its so late. Why is rail to Liverpool so bad, its only the London and TFW service that seem reliable. Plus this is a major touristic city, just going backwards.

 

[frodshamfella]

Interesting idea. I'm not sure.

Whilst I totally understand the reasons behind potentially terminating some of the services at Manchester (if this does turn out to be the case and not just the kind of speculation we get, like when not every single service has been uploaded into RTT and guesswork starts...), given that the line west of Piccadilly seems to be a big problem, I don't see the point in doing this *and* splitting the service at Nottingham. I could understand chopping it at Manchester in the first instance (i.e. Norwich - Manchester) but doing both seems a bit severe... rather than making one cut and seeing if it settles down (before considering a second cut?)





If I were travelling from Liverpool to Nottingham then I'd be put off by changing, yes. But then not a lot of people *do* travel from Liverpool to Nottingham each day (compared to the number who make journeys of up to an hour long to Manchester/ Sheffield/ Nottingham) - but se seem to be prioritising the handful of long distance passengers (and some civic price on Merseyside) ahead of regular everyday passengers.

(and, if direct services are so important then what about Cambridge passengers? Or Ipswich? Or Stansted? Or Blackpool? Or Cumbria? Or Manchester Airport? How many direct journey combinations do we cater to?)



I don't know the answer, but I'd rather have the London version (than the messy Northern version, where the obsession with direct services mean some towns have terrible frequencies into the nearest big city because the mesh of long distance services mean long gaps - e.g. thirty minute waits to do a typical everyday journey from Halifax to Bradford/ Leeds - because The Powers That Be are more interested in the line having through trains to Chester/ York/ Blackpool etc)

Im not sure thats true as I mentioned when I recently went Sth Pkwy to Norwich, as I left the train at Norwich I could see the seat reservation tags , plenty of Liverpool way beyond Manchester. Sheffield , Nottingham , Granthan and Norwich, so not just me doing the whole trip.

 

[frodshamfella]

Liverpool to beyond Manchester is another one where I'd be interested to see some actual demand numbers - from casual observation of eastbound trains, there is a very hefty 'churn' of passengers through the Manchester stations, so I'm not convinced there's all *that* many Liverpool passengers left on after Manchester.

Remembering of course that journeys like Liverpool-Peterborough (via TPE/LNER changing at Leeds) are now faster, and if Crewe-Derby gets extended to Nottingham, Liverpool-Crewe-Nottingham becomes a relatively attractive option.

As a Cambridge resident, using the EMR service to get to Manchester is still where the journey time is relatively attractive (if still slower) than other route. Liverpool, the balance has tipped entirely and via London is unquestionably faster.

Where has this weird idea that People from the Liverpool region don' t go to anywhere but Manchester, bizare !! And how about people arriving ? Tourists , VFR , they just come from Manchester too then , really !!?

 

[bunnahabhain]

Where has this weird idea that People from the Liverpool region don' t go to anywhere but Manchester, bizare !! And how about people arriving ? Tourists , VFR , they just come from Manchester too then , really !!?

There is a fairly large turnover of passengers at Manchester, it isn't unusual to have less than two dozen travelling from East of Stockport to West of Manchester. It is busier of course during the peak time or if you travel on one of the busier off peak services (0957/1057 ex Norwich, 0951/1051 ex Liverpool).

 

[Grumpy Git]

Where has this weird idea that People from the Liverpool region don' t go to anywhere but Manchester, bizare !! And how about people arriving ? Tourists , VFR , they just come from Manchester too then , really

There is a fairly large turnover of passengers at Manchester, it isn't unusual to have less than two dozen travelling from East of Stockport to West of Manchester. It is busier of course during the peak time or if you travel on one of the busier off peak services (0957/1057 ex Norwich, 0951/1051 ex Liverpool).

Still reduces my options to get to the airport by at least 33%.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Still reduces my options to get to the airport by at least 33%.

Once again, access to Ringway for a week in the sun once a year is not a basis on which to plan the North West's entire rail network.

 

[Grumpy Git]

Once again, access to Ringway for a week in the sun once a year is not a basis on which to plan the North West's entire rail network.

OK, but I've made one return journey to Manchester Airport every week since the last week in October and will be doing it again later this week. Maybe one of these journeys has gone entirely as I had originally planned? It would be much more convenient to drive or take a taxi (and more than an hour quicker in most circumstances), but I prefer the train, even if the railway does do it's best to frighten me off.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Maybe one of these journeys has gone entirely as I had originally planned?

Simplification and reduction of frequency but with longer trains is likely to assist in your journey going as planned, however. The pre-1997 timetable with far lower frequencies was much, much more reliable across the North than the present mess even with the vastly inferior equipment that they had back then.

 

[Grumpy Git]

That and a TOC who employs train crew with an obligation to work Sundays might be a start.