Liverpool to Norwich services to end at December 2021 timetable change

Discussion in 'Allocations, Diagrams & Timetables' started by jcollins, 7 Jun 2018.

  1. jcollins

    jcollins Veteran Member

    Messages:
    28,465
    Joined:
    23 Jan 2009
    I thought this controversial topic should have it's own thread. The EMT ITT released today confirms that from TSR2 (scheduled for December 2021) the East Midlands franchise will no longer operate services between Nottingham and Liverpool. They will continue to operate services between Nottingham and Norwich.

    While 185s under TPE has been mooted, would it be right for the route to get 185s when it's just as deserving of Intercity style trains as Liverpool to Scarborough?
     
    Last edited: 8 Jun 2018
  2. Registered users do not see these banners - join or log in today!

    Rail Forums

     
  3. Adam0984

    Adam0984 Member

    Messages:
    475
    Joined:
    18 Feb 2014
    Do you mean they won’t operate Notts to Liverpool but will continue Notts to Norwich?
     
  4. LNW-GW Joint

    LNW-GW Joint Veteran Member

    Messages:
    11,374
    Joined:
    22 Feb 2011
    Location:
    Mold, Clwyd
    The DfT is "minded" to transfer Liverpool-Nottingham to either TPE or Northern in Dec 2021, leaving Nottingham-Norwich with East Midlands.
    The transfer has yet to be agreed with TfN and TPE/Northern, and provision will be made to leave it with EM if agreement cannot be reached.
    They are also exploring extending the rump Norwich-Nottingham to serve Sheffield or Cambridge, nothing decided.

    They looked at transferring XC services from Nottingham to EM and decided against.

    I like this paragraph in the TSR summary:
     
  5. chubs

    chubs Member

    Messages:
    348
    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    A real shame.

    I used to use the service quite a bit and a lot of people value the direct services from Norwich, certainly I was never the only person travelling as far as Manchester usually there were lots of people. You don't save that much time going via London and if you have bags it's much more inconvenient.

    A change at Nottingham isn't the end of the world but it;s nice to have a pre booked seat you can just sit back and relax for 4/5 hours in.

    Better integration with the Birmingham Stansted service is a good idea but having trains alternating between the two is complicated and confusing for planners and the general public even if it makes enthusiasts happy. Ely is far from the nicest station in the world but it's small, has a ramped underpass and works as an interchange.
     
  6. Chester1

    Chester1 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,497
    Joined:
    25 Aug 2014
    I think it needs to be split because there are too many points along the route that can cause delays and the end to end journey time is far too long. If there is sufficient demand between Sheffield and Nottingham they could overlap TPE running Liverpool-Nottingham and EMT running Sheffield-Norwich with 2 coach units. I can't see Northern being given it any time soon as its a disaster and its an obvious TPE route. In the short term 2 x 185s would provide a very small increase in standard class capacity and add 30 first class seats. If TPE can neogiate a good deal for a follow on order with Hitachi then they could run it with 802s.
     
  7. Bwlch y Groes

    Bwlch y Groes Member

    Messages:
    198
    Joined:
    22 Jul 2017
    I know the expectation is that it will move to TPE, but I can see it going to Northern as a Northern Connect route:

    - It would make Northern the only operator between Nottingham and Sheffield via Alfreton (presumably with a transfer of stations)

    - It would make Northern the only operator between Liverpool and Manchester via Warrington Central

    - It negates the need to have TPE running into Nottingham as an extension of their network

    The question would be about Northern's capacity in terms of the fleet, but with this not happening until 2021, there will be plenty of DMUs available to pick up - 170s, 175s, TPE's spare 185s, even Hull Trains 180s, along with any potential top-up order of 195s, all of which would still be upgrades on the current 156s or 158s. If the DfT are willing to support the transfer with allowing Northern to bring in extra trains, it would make more sense to "tidy up" the network this way - I think that's what they may go for
     
  8. YorkshireBear

    YorkshireBear Established Member

    Messages:
    7,113
    Joined:
    23 Jul 2010
    I would like to see an overlap of services if they are split. I see Cambridge was mentioned earlier would be interesting to see services go there from Sheffield but it would surely have to be instead of Norwich. Not sure on loadings down there. I would certainly if there was capacity like to see it extended to Sheffield, with HS2 as well this may no longer be possible. But would Nottingham-Sheffield 3 trains per hour be overkill anyway? 2 calling at Ilkeston. All at Chesterfield. 2 at Dronfield.

    I think it sits better with TPE in terms of the new route keep it as an express cross pennine service. 6 car 185s as well.
     
  9. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    26,611
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    I think it is near certain to use 185s - the whole basis of splitting it is really to allow them to be used without moving the depot.
     
  10. 4-SUB 4732

    4-SUB 4732 Member

    Messages:
    176
    Joined:
    7 Jan 2018
    Would surely be better to run the service into Cambridge than Norwich; not least because the Norwich extension could be served by Anglia and even with a Norwich - Peterborough service or a Lowestoft - Peterborough service to compete with the X1 bus.
     
  11. jcollins

    jcollins Veteran Member

    Messages:
    28,465
    Joined:
    23 Jan 2009
    Interesting

    https://twitter.com/Clinnick1/status/1004721728688357376

    So it could mean 185s returning to Scarborough and Middlesbrough if TPE get given Liverpool to Nottingham!
     
  12. jamesontheroad

    jamesontheroad Established Member

    Messages:
    1,231
    Joined:
    24 Jan 2009
    Forgive me Chester1, but your post exactly characterises the small-mindedness of the DfT... a perfectly useful service needs to be cut because it risks being delayed and it's "too long." This is the railway deciding what services to offer based not on passenger need, but on operational efficiency.

    What would have been better would have been to bring the Birmingham - Stansted route into the same franchise as Liverpool - Norwich, and interwork them so you have Birmingham to Norwich and Stansted alternating, and Liverpool to Norwich and Stansted alternating.

    +1.

    I see no positives for the travelling public in this change. What can possibly be improved by removing direct services, and splitting one route across operators? Nottingham is a pain in the arse to connect in, given the distance of many of the eastern platforms from the two overbridges.

    I disagree. What would be confusing for a passenger in Manchester to see trains every two hours to Norwich and trains every two hours to Cambridge? This is basically what existed at the start of Sprinter-isation in the late eighties: trains from Norwich alternated between Birmingham and Liverpool.
     
  13. chubs

    chubs Member

    Messages:
    348
    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Why?

    Because you personally perceive there to be more demand from Cambridge? Can you back this up with some evidence please?

    There are frequent services from Ely to Cambridge.
     
  14. chubs

    chubs Member

    Messages:
    348
    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    It's usually on time when I take it. The end to end journey time for passengers will increase if it is split, or are we not meant to travel that far as it disrupts your plan for a route we rely on?

    Usually when this route is discussed on here everyone chimes in with the 'its too long, nobody travels end to end' but they do and even able bodied people like myself much refer the direct route.
     
  15. Chester1

    Chester1 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,497
    Joined:
    25 Aug 2014
    An end to end journey is already quicker via London. I would like to see the passenger numbers for Norwich to the North West.
     
  16. frodshamfella

    frodshamfella Member

    Messages:
    603
    Joined:
    25 Sep 2010
    Location:
    Frodsham
    I've used this service from Liverpool to Norwich, it's a long haul but its direct . I'm always travelling with luggage, changing at Nottingham is not nearly as attractive a travel proposition.
     
  17. Johnny Lewis

    Johnny Lewis Member

    Messages:
    202
    Joined:
    9 Jan 2011
    Location:
    York
    I never "get" why Liverpool to Norwich is supposedly too long a journey to operate reliably, when we run trains from Edinburgh to Plymouth, Manchester to Bournemourh, Manchester to Carmarthen/Milford Haven, Newcastle to Reading/Southampton etc. All at the same hourly frequency and all having to pass through a similar set of pinch points. Splitting Liverpool to Norwich merely illustrates the DfT's desperate need to be seen to be "doing something". In this case, this isn't a problem that actually needs fixing. So just leave well alone!
     
  18. tbtc

    tbtc Veteran Member

    Messages:
    14,486
    Joined:
    16 Dec 2008
    Location:
    Sheffield
    Small mindedness?

    They are prioritising the large number of people who want a reliable service over relatively short distance commutes, say journeys up to fifty miles (over the lower number of people who travel over a hundred and fifty miles)

    Look at today's Sheffield - Manchester - Liverpool (South Parkway) service:
    • 06:18 left two minutes late
    • 07:32 left over four minutes late
    • 08:41 left over four minutes late
    • 09:40 was on time (!!!!)
    • 10:40 left over a minute late
    • 11:41 left over five minutes late
    • 12:41 left over three minutes late
    • 13:40 left over two minutes late
    • 14:41 left over a minute late
    • 15:40 left over six minutes late
    • 16:40 left over three minutes late
    • 17:40 left three minutes late
    • 18:40 left over a minute late
    • 19:40 left over a minute late
    • 20:31 left over seven minutes late (the 20:31 terminates at Manchester because EMT run ECS back from Liverpool in the evening since they don't have a depot, so there's no services later than 19:40 from Sheffield to Liverpool - another thing that a change of TOC may change)

    That may only look like a minute or two here or there, but almost every service was late - and these trains need to deal with single track bottlenecks at Dore and Hazel Grove before they get over the Stockport Viaduct and through the congested 13/14 corridor at Piccadilly, before trying to get to Oxford Road before the half hourly Northern stoppers occupy the line through Warrington - e.g. the 11:41 from Sheffield was so late today that the Oxford Road - Warrington service was let out ahead of it, further delaying longer distance passengers.

    Maybe a few minutes here and there don't look so bad if you are doing a journey like Norwich to Liverpool - there's often sufficient recovery time at the final station that a service can be seen to catch up with any "lost" minutes, but the long distance nature of the service means that people doing short journeys (e.g. I know a couple of people who commute from Stockport to Sheffield) are at the mercy of disruptions far away.

    How are you planning on running the Peterborough - Ely services then? Half hourly (which means there'd be two Norwich services within half an hour of each other (and nothing for Norwich for another ninety minutes), then two Stansted services within half an hour of each other (and a similar ninety minute gap in the next Stansted service)? Or run the two services (from Peterborough to Ely) within a few minutes of each other, so that the Fens effectively lose around half their current frequency to the ECML?

    What can be improved by giving people a more reliable service over the kind of short/medium distances that they may commute on a regular basis (albeit removing a longer distance service that they might find useful once or twice a year)?

    Yes, we had services from Blackpool/ Windermere/ Liverpool through to Ipswich/ Cambridge/ Norwich, but that was in the days when there was a lot more gap in the timetable for those kind of quirky services.


    Although plenty of other long distance services have been chopped over the years - remember the "Yarmouth to Barmouth" railway (when Central Trains ran routes like Skegness - Manchester Airport)?

    Those XC services that you referred to have some very long dwells at intermediate stations, which is the price you pay. They also tend to serve much bigger places than the section of route east of Nottingham that is being chopped here.
     
  19. xotGD

    xotGD Established Member

    Messages:
    1,025
    Joined:
    4 Feb 2017
    Probably find that it won't be a booked connection at Nottingham and folk travelling between the two new services will end up having to fester for an hour.
     
  20. Ianno87

    Ianno87 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,531
    Joined:
    3 May 2015
    Or go other, faster ways. Like Cambridge-London-Manchester, or Peterborough-Leeds-Liverpool
     
  21. JOHNR150

    JOHNR150 Member

    Messages:
    21
    Joined:
    7 Jun 2018
    So under BR we had:

    Blackpool North-Norwich
    Liverpool-Norwich
    Blackpool North-Cambridge
    Blackpool North-Ipswich
    Blackpool North-Harwich
    Colchester-Barrow-in-Furness
    Barrow-in-Furness-Cambridge

    Yet today we have plans to move towards connecting services that do not offer the same long-distance options that were decades past and with rolling stock that cost a fraction of what it does today. I do not care what people said I am so happy British Rail is done and that private compaines lead the way, we must ensure that no true railway men ever run and manage the services like they did under the BR period.
     
  22. Ianno87

    Ianno87 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,531
    Joined:
    3 May 2015
    My personal view: The staggering Growth in recent years of the Cambridge area means there's probably revenue and a commercial case to be had, particularly where demand is probably suppressed by the need to change at Ely/Peterborough. Just look at the numbers joining a typical XC service at Cambridge now.
     
  23. JOHNR150

    JOHNR150 Member

    Messages:
    21
    Joined:
    7 Jun 2018
    Cambridge-London-Manchester on the face of it does not seem the most direct route.
     
  24. eastdyke

    eastdyke Established Member

    Messages:
    1,026
    Joined:
    25 Jan 2010
    Location:
    East Midlands
    When I was Norwich based and used the service a few passengers did the full Manchester or Liverpool but in truth not very many. I think that the proposal would be to the biggest detriment to travel between stations east of Nottingham and Sheffield (and vv).
    More journeys would be made via Doncaster :'(.
    Personally I will be affected if the Norwich leg is re-routed via Oakham, my route to Norwich and other East Anglian places via Grantham will be a lot less attractive :frown::frown:.
     
  25. ac6000cw

    ac6000cw Established Member

    Messages:
    1,478
    Joined:
    10 May 2014
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    Agreed.

    In 2016-2017 (from the ORR station usage estimates) Cambridge station had nearly three times as many 'entrances and exits' (11.4 million) as Norwich, and more than Sheffield or Nottingham.
     
  26. JOHNR150

    JOHNR150 Member

    Messages:
    21
    Joined:
    7 Jun 2018
    We have been here before BR operated direct Cambridge to Liverpool and also Cambridge to Blackpool North with some typically one or two daily services to Barrow-in-Furness. How history tends to repeat especially when there is little strategy.
     
  27. 47802

    47802 Established Member

    Messages:
    3,336
    Joined:
    8 Oct 2013
    You would think TPE keeping the 185's is no brainer in order to accommodate this, either by using the 185's directly of displacing the Loco Hauled stock onto this route.
     
  28. 4-SUB 4732

    4-SUB 4732 Member

    Messages:
    176
    Joined:
    7 Jan 2018
    Perhaps more importantly it is the ability for EMT to run a half-hourly service from Cambridge to Peterborough, extending to 'wherever' (Birmingham, Nottingham, Manchester, Liverpool whatever it happens to be); and inter-working of stock and crews making things more resource-intelligent and equally Anglia picking up the half-hourly Cambridge to Stansted as Norwich extensions. It's more to do with rationalising stock and crew and being smart about how you do things.
     
  29. bspahh

    bspahh Member

    Messages:
    214
    Joined:
    5 Jan 2017
    It would make the departure boards at Ely easier to understand. It doesn't help to have trains to Liverpool Street and Liverpool Lime Street on the same screen.
     
  30. Ianno87

    Ianno87 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,531
    Joined:
    3 May 2015
    That only happens for an hour of two in the morning peak now anyway - the last direct Ely-Liverpool St train of the day is gone by 0800...
     
  31. chubs

    chubs Member

    Messages:
    348
    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    For Manchester the difference is negligible (30-60 minutes) and you have to lug your bags across the underground. I'm young and fit and don't want to do it if a direct service exists, I've travelled on that route with plenty of elderly people who almost certainly couldn't do it.
     

Share This Page