Liverpool to Sheffield but then where

[northwichcat]

I mentioned this is another thread but thought I'd start a new thread and allow people to vote on it.

Currently EMT run Liverpool-Sheffield-Norwich and TPE run Manchester Airport-Sheffield-Cleethorphes.

Should instead we have EMT running Manchester Airport-Sheffield-Norwich and TPE running Liverpool-Cleethorphes? I appreciate a change would mean TPE would have to adjust either the North or South TPE services for consistency and that TPE would need either the surplus 180s or some 170s cascaded to them to allow this.

 

[ivanhoe]

Leave things as they are. Liverpool to Nottingham/ Norwich works well. The fact that extra carriages are going to be introduced, perhaps suggests that the route is a success.

Liverpool to Sheffield/ Cleethorpes means Sheffield misses out on an early morning direct service to Manchester Airport.

The real issues are Hope Valley Capacity and the Dore Problem. That's were the investment is required. So No for me

 

[northwichcat]

The fact that extra carriages are going to be introduced, perhaps suggests that the route is a success.

Not really. EMT have less carriages to use on the service than CT used. This was apparently down to DfT using out-of-date figures when deciding how many carriages EMT needed for Liverpool-Norwich.

You have to also ask how many people boarding at Liverpool and Warrington travel beyond Sheffield. I imagine it wouldn't be all that dis-similar a number to the number of people who would travel to/from Liverpool and Warrington on a Liverpool-Cleethorphes service.

 

[tbtc]

I can't see any real benefit from this other than the 185s on Cleethorpes - Liverpool would have better doors for unloading/loading at 13/14 at Manchester Piccadilly (though maybe no better than the *four* coach 158s EMT will be running), but there is the obvious downside that the Manchester Airport trains would go from 185s (with lots of luggage space/ spacious doors) to 158s (high density seats, narrow doors etc).

Not convinced, sorry.

 

[ivanhoe]

Not really. EMT have less carriages to use on the service than CT used. This was apparently down to DfT using out-of-date figures when deciding how many carriages EMT needed for Liverpool-Norwich.

You have to also ask how many people boarding at Liverpool and Warrington travel beyond Sheffield. I imagine it wouldn't be all that dis-similar a number to the number of people who would travel to/from Liverpool and Warrington on a Liverpool-Cleethorphes service.

I fully understand the point that you make but Liverpool Norwich is a type of service ( Inter Regional) that gives journey options to many passengers. One issue that many don't bother to discuss is Nottingham itself. It's position on the national rail network is not good for connections. Nottingham wants fast connections to London ( Nottingham to London in 90) but needs major work at other points on the network to make things happen. I have no idea how many people wish to travel to Manchester Airport from Nottingham but to chop Liverpool to Sheffield means that an unknown number passengers from Nottingham can go to Manchester Airport . I see no Business nor Social case for change.

 

[MCR247]

I'd keep it the same but add a Nottingham - Manchester fast calling at;

Nottingham - Derby - Chesterfield - Stockport - Manchester Piccadilly - (Manchester Airport)

Or you could make the fast go to Liverpool, and terminate the Norwich in Manchester...

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

My son-in-law uses the Liverpool - Norwich service and he says it is disgraceful to have to travel in such small sized trains on this route from Liverpool to Sheffield (and return) that he does Monday to Friday. He said that the company that ran that service before was far better in all respect.

I have just telephoned him and his reply was to run a fast Liverpool - Manchester - Sheffield INTER-CITY train (to use his exact words) which joins three major cities together, in addition to any existing services.

I mentioned that you are having a poll and he said that he would like to use my vote (as he actually commutes on the route). He voted for the "status quo", but said that Manchester Airport could do with rail services to the East Midlands and East Anglia for business-class passenger use on the long-distance airline routes that MANCHESTER airport offers to the business community that are not offered by either the airports in the Liverpool and in the East Midlands areas. He has just flown into Manchester Airport on the king-sized Emirates plane on Friday.

 

[northwichcat]

I can't see any real benefit from this other than the 185s on Cleethorpes - Liverpool would have better doors for unloading/loading at 13/14 at Manchester Piccadilly (though maybe no better than the *four* coach 158s EMT will be running), but there is the obvious downside that the Manchester Airport trains would go from 185s (with lots of luggage space/ spacious doors) to 158s (high density seats, narrow doors etc).

I wouldn't say 185s do have a lot of luggage space. The Cleethorphes-Airport service always seems to see less suitcases on it than the North and North West routes.

The TPE franchise could well be revised in January 2012 so timetable and route revisions could easily happen.

How about a new North TPE timetable of:
xx:03 Airport to Scarborough (Piccadilly xx:24 departure)
xx:52 Liverpool to Newcastle (including 4x180 diagrams, Piccadilly xx:37 departure)
xx:03 Airport to Middlesbrough (Piccadilly xx:54 departure)
xx:09 Piccadilly to Hull

And South TPE/EMT timetable of:
xx:22 Liverpool to Cleethorphes (Piccadilly xx:11 departure)
xx:27 Airport to Norwich (Piccadilly xx:42 departure)

This way:
* EMT have more 158s available so it'll be easier for them to make all Airport-Norwich services 4 car, at least west of Nottingham. As the 158s will be 4 car I can't see amount of luggage being an issue.
* TPE will have extra 185s available so it'll mean no need to keep the current 2 car workings on South TPE.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

means Sheffield misses out on an early morning direct service to Manchester Airport.

Not necessarily. EMT send a unit ECS Nottingham-Liverpool to run the 06:47 Liverpool-Norwich. If that unit ran to the Airport and was in service then problem solved.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

He said that the company that ran that service before was far better in all respect.

CT rarely used 2 car formations. They mainly used 3-5 car formations of 158s and 170s (one or the other - I never saw a mix.)

I have just telephoned him and his reply was to run a fast Liverpool - Manchester - Sheffield INTER-CITY train (to use his exact words) which joins three major cities together, in addition to any existing services.

One thing to note when you say "intercity" is that intercity services have always included towns that get a high patronage or need additional services at peak times. As well as remembering that a city does not have to be bigger than a town e.g. Bolton is bigger than Lancaster and Huddersfield is bigger than Wakefield.

I mentioned that you are having a poll and he said that he would like to use my vote (as he actually commutes on the route). He voted for the "status quo", but said that Manchester Airport could do with rail services to the East Midlands and East Anglia for business-class passenger use on the long-distance airline routes that MANCHESTER airport offers to the business community that are not offered by either the airports in the Liverpool and in the East Midlands areas. He has just flown into Manchester Airport on the king-sized Emirates plane on Friday.

Just to clarify I haven't at any time suggested Sheffield should lose either it's direct Manchester Airport service or it's direct Liverpool service. Although, I have suggested that Doncaster and Grimsby should lose it's direct Airport service in favour of a Liverpool one and that Chesterfield and Nottingham should gain an Airport service in favour of a Liverpool one.

 

[tbtc]

I wouldn't say 185s do have a lot of luggage space

Compared to the way the seats are crammed into an EMT 158 I'd say the 185s have a lot more space for luggage

* TPE will have extra 185s available so it'll mean no need to keep the current 2 car workings on South TPE

I like the idea of getting 180s to replace 185s to allow all 170s to be doubled up, though I've not done the maths. However, the forthcoming electrification in Lancashire will mean spare 185s (allowing the 170s to be completely replaced), so this will be solved regardless.

How about a new North TPE timetable of:
xx:03 Airport to Scarborough (Piccadilly xx:24 departure)
xx:52 Liverpool to Newcastle (including 4x180 diagrams, Piccadilly xx:37 departure)
xx:03 Airport to Middlesbrough (Piccadilly xx:54 departure)
xx:09 Piccadilly to Hull

You would lose the half hourly Northallerton service, if the Newcastle and Middlesbrough services ran within fifteen minutes of each other, unfortunately.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'd keep it the same but add a Nottingham - Manchester fast calling at;

Nottingham - Derby - Chesterfield - Stockport - Manchester Piccadilly - (Manchester Airport)

Or you could make the fast go to Liverpool, and terminate the Norwich in Manchester...

I've suggested before that the Preston - Hazel Grove service is extended via the Hope Valley to the East Midlands (no new paths through Manchester required), thus avoiding the need for the EMT service to reverse at Sheffield, and freeing up a lot of seats for Sheffield passengers.

 

[northwichcat]

You would lose the half hourly Northallerton service, if the Newcastle and Middlesbrough services ran within fifteen minutes of each other, unfortunately.

I'd overlooked Northallerton but on checking it's only half-hourly southbound. Northbound it's a bit inconsistent. Sometimes the Middlesbrough service has a longer stop at Leeds than the Newcastle service, with the Middlesbrough additionally calls at Garforth and Thirsk making it 20 and 40 minute gaps between services, although other times it's 28 and 32 minutes

 

[xtradj]

the liverpool - norwich is a joke of a service.. old small cramp.. and very packed carriages

stopping at pointless mediocre stations

Liverpool to norwich should be split.. liverpool to nottm.. and nottm to norwich

and should only call at major stations

all the minor stations can be served by intemediate train services

it should be Liverpool - Lpool SPW - War Central - Ox Rd - Pic - Stock - Shef - Chesterfield - Nottm

Widnes / Dore / Alfreton / Dronfield .. and stations as such should not be called at, and instead be used by intermediate services

 

[tbtc]

Widnes / Dore / Alfreton / Dronfield .. and stations as such should not be called at, and instead be used by intermediate services

I agree with the bulk of what you are saying, but there's a difference between Widnes (which gets plenty other trains stopping at it and is well connected) and Dore (which gets a Pacer every two hours), so less option to stop other trains there

 

[northwichcat]

it should be Liverpool - Lpool SPW - War Central - Ox Rd - Pic - Stock - Shef - Chesterfield - Nottm

Widnes / Dore / Alfreton / Dronfield .. and stations as such should not be called at, and instead be used by intermediate services

Interesting you consider Chesterfield to be in a different category to Widnes. Chesterfield isn't much bigger than Widnes but get's a better level of service. Also Northern don't keep Widnes ticket office open beyond 2pm so there's likely a lot of passengers travelling from Widnes who don't buy tickets.

One of the problems, especially at peak times, is that there aren't enough local services and it's not just a lack of trains but a lack of paths on existing infrastructure.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I fully understand the point that you make but Liverpool Norwich is a type of service ( Inter Regional) that gives journey options to many passengers. One issue that many don't bother to discuss is Nottingham itself. It's position on the national rail network is not good for connections. Nottingham wants fast connections to London ( Nottingham to London in 90) but needs major work at other points on the network to make things happen. I have no idea how many people wish to travel to Manchester Airport from Nottingham but to chop Liverpool to Sheffield means that an unknown number passengers from Nottingham can go to Manchester Airport . I see no Business nor Social case for change.

I think that if you read the original posting, Liverpool to Sheffield is NOT proposed to be discontinued, as this is the only way that a proposed Liverpool to Cleethorpes service could run.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'd overlooked Northallerton but on checking it's only half-hourly southbound. Northbound it's a bit inconsistent. Sometimes the Middlesbrough service has a longer stop at Leeds than the Newcastle service, with the Middlesbrough additionally calls at Garforth and Thirsk making it 20 and 40 minute gaps between services, although other times it's 28 and 32 minutes

Correct me if I am wrong, would your proposals take away the Manchester Airport to Newcastle service? I have used this service from the airport many times and it has a good number of Newcastle region passengers who visit the American holiday resorts, who always seem to have many "Disneyland" visitors amongst them.

If you do propose this, bang goes my wife's direct service from Manchester Airport to Durham with all the "Lady Amazons" who make up the local W.I. You are a braver man than I if you propose to try to cross this bunch of formidable ladies....and their hats

Finally, thank you for responding to my earlier posting....but the comments expressed were those of my son-in-law,not mine. I just reported exactly what he said, so you could judge on what an actual business passenger thinks of the service that HE has to use. I would never use the words INTER-CITY as he did:roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I agree with the bulk of what you are saying, but there's a difference between Widnes (which gets plenty other trains stopping at it and is well connected) and Dore (which gets a Pacer every two hours), so less option to stop other trains there

Widnes and Dore are in no way compatable in terms of population density and in the numbers in both catchment areas that would be actual rail users, should trains have reasonable rolling stock for them to use.

 

[northwichcat]

Correct me if I am wrong, would your proposals take away the Manchester Airport to Newcastle service? I have used this service from the airport many times and it has a good number of Newcastle region passengers who visit the American holiday resorts, who always seem to have many "Disneyland" visitors amongst them.

If you do propose this, bang goes my wife's direct service from Manchester Airport to Durham with all the "Lady Amazons" who make up the local W.I. You are a braver man than I if you propose to try to cross this bunch of formidable ladies....and their hats

I suggested it that way to keep the Newcastle service in the same slot. Of course, you can switch around my Scarborough/Middlesbrough and Newcastle suggestions but that'll make it more of a complete timetable recast.

The regular direct Newcastle-Airport services is only something that's been available for the past few years. Most services used to be Sunderland-Newcastle-Liverpool.

 

[EM2]

Going slightly OT, I took a Manc Picc to Sheffield EMT service, that was 2x158s. I assumed it was a Liverpool-Norwich, but from the discussion here, it seems that's always a single 158. So what was it?

 

[northwichcat]

Going slightly OT, I took a Manc Picc to Sheffield EMT service, that was 2x158s. I assumed it was a Liverpool-Norwich, but from the discussion here, it seems that's always a single 158. So what was it?

Assuming it was recently then it was an EMT service. If you're talking about a few years ago then it could have been a TPE service.

The simple reason for 2 car operation is basically what I said in an earlier post. Central Trains used 3-5 car formations of 158s and 170s to run the service but DfT got hold of out-of-date passenger counts when drawing up the new franchises and decided EMT didn't need as many carriages to run the service as CT had used on it so it became mainly 2 car operation with 4 cars on the busiest diagrams.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I suggested it that way to keep the Newcastle service in the same slot. Of course, you can switch around my Scarborough/Middlesbrough and Newcastle suggestions but that'll make it more of a complete timetable recast.

The regular direct Newcastle-Airport services is only something that's been available for the past few years. Most services used to be Sunderland-Newcastle-Liverpool.

It goes to show how well the marketing has been for this route to Newcastle from Manchester Airport and of the success that it has enjoyed so far.

The wide-ranging types of air routes, including prestigeous long-haul routes such as those operated by Emirates from Manchester Airport, which is a north of England hub airport, are far different than those offered by Liverpool John Lennon airport when considering the service that you quoted as its predessor, which at that time did not offer airline connections.

 

[MCR247]

Going slightly OT, I took a Manc Picc to Sheffield EMT service, that was 2x158s. I assumed it was a Liverpool-Norwich, but from the discussion here, it seems that's always a single 158. So what was it?

Most Nottingham- Liverpool trains are now 4 cars. People exaggerate a lot.

Once all Liverpool - Norwich trains are 4 car west of Nottingham then nothing else needs sorting.

Why would you want to re-route into the Airport? Completely pointless and causes more problems than it solves.:roll:

 

[WestCountry]

Once all Liverpool - Norwich trains are 4 car west of Nottingham then nothing else needs sorting.

Really? Living down the other end, I've been unable to board westbound at Ely in the past. Maybe not such a frequent occurrence as up north though

 

[Lampshade]

Really? Living down the other end, I've been unable to board westbound at Ely in the past. Maybe not such a frequent occurrence as up north though

Sheffield to Warrington at any time after 1100 is the definition of the chaos theory.

 

[WestCoast]

Most Nottingham- Liverpool trains are now 4 cars. People exaggerate a lot.

:roll:Are you sure about that?

Tell that to crush-loaded commuters - booked 4-car services can appear as 2-car fairly often! According to this I found from last month:

Afraid not. Not even 50% of the Nott's-Liverpool services are diagrammed for four car sets at the minute. IIRR 07:52 Liv-Not, 06:40 Not-Liv (and return) 14:45 and 15:45 Not-Liv's (and return) and 21:36 Liv-Not are the only one's.

 

[MCR247]

Sorry, from what I heard most were 4 car, obviously my source was wrong!

And I know that the 084x is/was booked 4 car, as I was on it from Grantham as it was delayed at PBO for 30 mins and EMT ran the 2 coaches sitting in P5 as that train and terminated the Norwich portion at Nottingham.

A common occurrance :roll:

 

[RichW1]

My son-in-law uses the Liverpool - Norwich service and he says it is disgraceful to have to travel in such small sized trains on this route from Liverpool to Sheffield (and return) that he does Monday to Friday. He said that the company that ran that service before was far better in all respect.

I have just telephoned him and his reply was to run a fast Liverpool - Manchester - Sheffield INTER-CITY train (to use his exact words) which joins three major cities together, in addition to any existing services.

I mentioned that you are having a poll and he said that he would like to use my vote (as he actually commutes on the route). He voted for the "status quo", but said that Manchester Airport could do with rail services to the East Midlands and East Anglia for business-class passenger use on the long-distance airline routes that MANCHESTER airport offers to the business community that are not offered by either the airports in the Liverpool and in the East Midlands areas. He has just flown into Manchester Airport on the king-sized Emirates plane on Friday.

I agree, keep the trains the same on service front but the above is interesting. This brings me back to my point made several times about inappropriate trains on routes that should be Intercity! BR actually had things better in this respect for all their faults. Norwich to Liverpool is a fair mileage too and deserves IC standards IMHO.

 

[tbtc]

I agree, keep the trains the same on service front but the above is interesting. This brings me back to my point made several times about inappropriate trains on routes that should be Intercity! BR actually had things better in this respect for all their faults. Norwich to Liverpool is a fair mileage too and deserves IC standards IMHO.

Intercity is a difficult "standard" to decide though.

Should it be for long distance routes (Glasgow Queen Street - Mallaig is a much longer journey than most "Intercity" ones)?

Should it be for travel between cities (lots of "Intercity" services serve towns, but there's no Intercity service between Newcastle and Sunderland for example)?

There's no simple black/white way of looking at it.

 

[northwichcat]

Should it be for travel between cities (lots of "Intercity" services serve towns, but there's no Intercity service between Newcastle and Sunderland for example)?

To complicate matters further should an intercity service always offer FC and/or catering? If so that could make 2 out of the 3 express services between Liverpool and Manchester not intercity.

 

[Andrew Nelson]

I can't see any real benefit from this other than the 185s on Cleethorpes - Liverpool would have better doors for unloading/loading at 13/14 at Manchester Piccadilly (though maybe no better than the *four* coach 158s EMT will be running), but there is the obvious downside that the Manchester Airport trains would go from 185s (with lots of luggage space/ spacious doors) to 158s (high density seats, narrow doors etc).

Not convinced, sorry.

"with lots of luggage space"

What?

A 185?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Intercity is a difficult "standard" to decide though.

Should it be for long distance routes (Glasgow Queen Street - Mallaig is a much longer journey than most "Intercity" ones)?

Should it be for travel between cities (lots of "Intercity" services serve towns, but there's no Intercity service between Newcastle and Sunderland for example)?

There's no simple black/white way of looking at it.

There is. INTER CITY should mean exactly what these two words say...connection between main population areas, Your example is perfect for the first word (GLASGOW) ... but MALLAIG:roll: What is the population in that area? A better example would surely be Glasgow and Edinburgh.

Your point about Newcastle and Sunderland could also be compared to Leeds and Bradford and also to Manchester and Liverpool. In areas where there is a small distance between two cities, with large populations, you will normallly find a co-ordinated fast commuter service. There are many such areas in the North of England as a result of the Industrial Revolution.

 

[WestCoast]

There is. INTER CITY should mean exactly what these two words say...connection between main population areas, Your example is perfect for the first word (GLASGOW) ... but MALLAIG:roll: What is the population in that area? A better example would surely be Glasgow and Edinburgh.

Glasgow and Edinburgh is not a long enough journey to be intercity.

If you want to get fussy about the classification system of trains look no further than DB, they have:

Regional
Regional-Express
Inter-Regional
Inter City
Inter City Express

Because of the nature of the Norwich to Liverpool it would be best classified as Inter-Regional (numerous stops, high density seating, no first class e.t.c) with Glasgow to Edinburgh being Regional Express. Penzance - Aberdeen would be an example of an Inter City route (long distance serving towns and cities but with a 'high' standard of accommodation) with London-Glasgow an example of an Inter City Express (fast, fewer stops e.t.c). It's about stopping patterns, speed, train type (first class?), catering and distance.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think that Glasgow and Edinburgh was reasonable to say in that case as it connects the two major cities in Scotland and is an example that could not be made of two English cities for historical reasons by means of a comparison.. Far better that Glasgow to Mallaig as an example to have been quoted.

We are not talking of DB here....we are discussing the situation in Britain as we find it. But your statement about INTER REGIONAL has much to commend it and I am totally with you on that point