LNR new WCML timetable, May 2019 (in open data feeds)

[sd0733]

I wouldn't be quite so sure. There is an extra tph between Wolverhampton and Stafford in the new timetable, meaning that there would probably still be 2 non-overtaken itineraries per hour from Birmingham to Liverpool. Obviously not as convenient as a through service if you have to change, but if it's somewhere like Stafford then it could even be scheduled as a same-platform or cross-platform change.

Such a change is already commonly recommended by journey planners for passengers heading from the Trent Valley semifast to stations Crewe and north. It's even announced by the station staff manually whenever the semifast arrives, indicating quite how many people use it.

Yes there is a big market from the likes of Milton Keynes, Rugby, Nuneaton to Liverpool and the TOC itself would love to extend to Liverpool or Preston but The bidding only included the allocation to the franchise bidders of 2 paths between Crewe and Weaver junction so unless this was relaxed a 3rd tph between Crewe and Liverpool would have to be routed via Earlestown. This is where this Manchester Airport plan came from

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

The bidding only included the allocation to the franchise bidders of 2 paths between Crewe and Weaver junction so unless this was relaxed a 3rd tph between Crewe and Liverpool would have to be routed via Earlestown.

If there's the capacity via Earlestown - and as far as Earlestown on the WCML - then it wouldn't be such a bad move. Earlestown would get some of the links to/from the south that we are so often told it desperately needs!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes there is a big market from the likes of Milton Keynes, Rugby, Nuneaton to Liverpool and the TOC itself would love to extend to Liverpool or Preston but The bidding only included the allocation to the franchise bidders of 2 paths between Crewe and Weaver junction so unless this was relaxed a 3rd tph between Crewe and Liverpool would have to be routed via Earlestown. This is where this Manchester Airport plan came from

What *would* be good would be the 8-car Trent Valley service running to Warrington BQ then splitting and half running to Preston and half to Liverpool?

 

[driver_m]

If there's the capacity via Earlestown - and as far as Earlestown on the WCML - then it wouldn't be such a bad move. Earlestown would get some of the links to/from the south that we are so often told it desperately needs!

Have they? And theres me thinking it was actually St Helens that quite a few of us have actually banged on about .Earlestown is just run by the council of St Helens. It's a separate town in its own right.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Have they? And theres me thinking it was actually St Helens that quite a few of us have actually banged on about .Earlestown is just run by the council of St Helens. It's a separate town in its own right.

I think people have complained about both!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Have they? And theres me thinking it was actually St Helens that quite a few of us have actually banged on about .Earlestown is just run by the council of St Helens. It's a separate town in its own right.

The railway geography of St Helens pretty much precludes services to the south - but this service could call at Junction to provide that. Maybe one for Speculative Ideas if we want to discuss that in more depth?

 

[driver_m]

The railway geography of St Helens pretty much precludes services to the south - but this service could call at Junction to provide that. Maybe one for Speculative Ideas if we want to discuss that in more depth?

Not really. Ince Moss Jn. Is now able to take passenger moves to go southbound and the Junction has always had the capability. It's even on Merseytravel's wishlist of aspirations to divert a London via St Helens for this very purpose. But that digresses from this thread which is about LNR and AFAIK they still don't even sign Chat Moss for diversions out of Lime St which is short sighted of whoever decided that they can't head north of Weaver Jn. Maybe LNR will be the most likely option for a service like this in the future if they're allowed to do diverts via St Helens and can realistically expand their Crewe -TV- London services for such a service in the future.

 

[RealTrains07]

Wasnt aware of the that, at the time when they announced the new london to liverpool service I presumed taken that the new map LNR produced showed The same routes as the new timetable

Considering what the LNR network map shows, you can see why people would think that liverpool-london would go via trent valley.
Generally i feel like trent valley is being given bare all compared to the route via birmingham.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Considering what the LNR network map shows, you can see why people would think that liverpool-london would go via trent valley.
Generally i feel like trent valley is being given bare all compared to the route via birmingham.

Even as someone who would previously have benefitted from a better Trent Valley semifast service, I think the number of people travelling from the West Midlands metropolitan corridor is likely to far exceed the number travelling from the Trent Valley corridor, sufficiently such as to justify the 3 trains an hour it gets. Trent Valley best justifies something between half hourly and hourly, IMO - much of the current overcrowding is down to train lengths rather than anything else. Perhaps an additional hourly all-shacks service from Crewe to Rugby via Stoke (and the Trent Valley) might be justified, connecting nicely with some of the faster (i.e. VT) Rugby to London services, with a cross platform change where possible. I imagine I'm about to be told that the line capacity doesn't exist for that, though!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Considering what the LNR network map shows, you can see why people would think that liverpool-london would go via trent valley.
Generally i feel like trent valley is being given bare all compared to the route via birmingham.

Given that Euston-Northampton(-Birmingham) and Birmingham-Liverpool are the two main core LNR routes, this is neither surprising nor wrong.

 

[RealTrains07]

Even as someone who would previously have benefitted from a better Trent Valley semifast service, I think the number of people travelling from the West Midlands metropolitan corridor is likely to far exceed the number travelling from the Trent Valley corridor, sufficiently such as to justify the 3 trains an hour it gets. Trent Valley best justifies something between half hourly and hourly, IMO - much of the current overcrowding is down to train lengths rather than anything else. Perhaps an additional hourly all-shacks service from Crewe to Rugby via Stoke (and the Trent Valley) might be justified, connecting nicely with some of the faster (i.e. VT) Rugby to London services, with a cross platform change where possible. I imagine I'm about to be told that the line capacity doesn't exist for that, though!

Shame that service between rugby and crewe via stoke is unlikely given the current climate

 

[Bletchleyite]

Shame that service between rugby and crewe via stoke is unlikely given the current climate

There would be no point in *not* running it on to at least Northampton.

 

[Class 170101]

Even as someone who would previously have benefitted from a better Trent Valley semifast service, I think the number of people travelling from the West Midlands metropolitan corridor is likely to far exceed the number travelling from the Trent Valley corridor, sufficiently such as to justify the 3 trains an hour it gets. Trent Valley best justifies something between half hourly and hourly, IMO - much of the current overcrowding is down to train lengths rather than anything else. Perhaps an additional hourly all-shacks service from Crewe to Rugby via Stoke (and the Trent Valley) might be justified, connecting nicely with some of the faster (i.e. VT) Rugby to London services, with a cross platform change where possible. I imagine I'm about to be told that the line capacity doesn't exist for that, though!

Shame that service between rugby and crewe via stoke is unlikely given the current climate

There would be no point in *not* running it on to at least Northampton.

Problem is where would 30 minute service to the Trent Valley? 30 minutes apart departing Rugby or 30 minutes apart departing London heading north? A 30 minute service from London heading north won't be 30 minutes apart at Rugby and likewise 30 minutes apart at Rugby won't be from London if routed via Northampton as its slower than operating via the direct (Weedon) route. It would also have to split at Northampton (join heading south) from another service which adds time and reliability issues to the journey.

In both cases paths are not available on the WCML hence the splitting train. Consequently having had a brief look heading north to ensure a broadly 30 minute split at Rugby it would leave Euston at xx49, three minutes after the xx46 to Crewe. It also takes no account of any other trains.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Problem is where would 30 minute service to the Trent Valley? 30 minutes apart departing Rugby or 30 minutes apart departing London heading north? A 30 minute service from London heading north won't be 30 minutes apart at Rugby and likewise 30 minutes apart at Rugby won't be from London if routed via Northampton as its slower than operating via the direct (Weedon) route. It would also have to split at Northampton (join heading south) from another service which adds time and reliability issues to the journey.

In both cases paths are not available on the WCML hence the splitting train. Consequently having had a brief look heading north to ensure a broadly 30 minute split at Rugby it would leave Euston at xx49, three minutes after the xx46 to Crewe. It also takes no account of any other trains.

I don't think anyone would propose taking the through train from Euston. It's about providing a more frequent service on the local lines around the Trent Valley, between settlements that are each medium sized each in their own right. So, if an extension to Northampton is at all needed, it would be for operational convenience if at all. The number of people who actually want to go to Northampton is going to be a lot lower than the number that want to go between the Trent Valley settlements. Indeed, if a more frequent stopping service were to be provided then it might even be a more viable route for branch-to-branch journeys, e.g. Walsall to Blake Street, where going via Birmingham and congesting the trains that way is currently the default option.

 

[BluePenguin]

Though whether you'd want to is for debate

I'd always want to split a journey that long up at New St anyway.

Well, you could always buy the ticket for that journey and then change at Stafford or Crewe for a quicker train.

I suppose if you specifically wanted/needed to go via Birmingham you could catch a faster Virgin train if you bought a separate ticket

 

[Class 170101]

To be honest most people would still travel via New Street simply because the services in question would be more frequent.

 

[DavidGrain]

the number that want to go between the Trent Valley settlements. Indeed, if a more frequent stopping service were to be provided then it might even be a more viable route for branch-to-branch journeys, e.g. Walsall to Blake Street, where going via Birmingham and congesting the trains that way is currently the default option.

I don't understand the idea of Walsall to Blake Street. How would that fit in with the LNR WCML timetable? This routing would fall wholly within WMR territory and require a reverse. Trains can terminate at Blake Street but currently only one per day do so. I don't know passenger numbers at Blake Street but I suspect that they are inflated by people like me who buy Blake Street to Lichfield tickets because Blake Street is right on the county boundary and my pass does not cover Staffordshire.

 

[43074]

I don't understand the idea of Walsall to Blake Street. How would that fit in with the LNR WCML timetable? This routing would fall wholly within WMR territory and require a reverse. Trains can terminate at Blake Street but currently only one per day do so. I don't know passenger numbers at Blake Street but I suspect that they are inflated by people like me who buy Blake Street to Lichfield tickets because Blake Street is right on the county boundary and my pass does not cover Staffordshire.

I think the poster was using that as an example of a journey which could be made easier by running a more frequent Trent Valley service rather than saying there should be a direct service. In any case, it makes more sense to go via New Street in that case anyway rather than faffing around changing twice at Rugeley and Lichfield.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Not really. Ince Moss Jn. Is now able to take passenger moves to go southbound and the Junction has always had the capability. It's even on Merseytravel's wishlist of aspirations to divert a London via St Helens for this very purpose. But that digresses from this thread which is about LNR and AFAIK they still don't even sign Chat Moss for diversions out of Lime St which is short sighted of whoever decided that they can't head north of Weaver Jn. Maybe LNR will be the most likely option for a service like this in the future if they're allowed to do diverts via St Helens and can realistically expand their Crewe -TV- London services for such a service in the future.

Last week I think a Warrington BQ-Liverpool 319 went via Bamfurlong-Ince Moss when there was disruption west of Earlestown (Tuesday 12th).
RTT showed it up to Earlestown P4 (a Manchester platform) and reappearing at Huyton Jn.
Must be one of the very few times the Ince Moss curve has been used for a passenger train (unless it went up to Wigan and reversed).
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y52216/2019/03/12/advanced

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I think the poster was using that as an example of a journey which could be made easier by running a more frequent Trent Valley service rather than saying there should be a direct service. In any case, it makes more sense to go via New Street in that case anyway rather than faffing around changing twice at Rugeley and Lichfield.

Exactly. It's not necessarily about what particular journey either, it could be about Tamworth to Sutton Coldfield, or Nuneaton to Hednesford. All of which have a one-change option, either via Birmingham or not via Birmingham. Going not via Birmingham should be made to be a more attractive option than it is now, such as to reduce the number of people who 'needlessly' go via Birmingham, in order to free up capacity for people who actually going to Birmingham.

 

[driver_m]

Last week I think a Warrington BQ-Liverpool 319 went via Bamfurlong-Ince Moss when there was disruption west of Earlestown (Tuesday 12th).
RTT showed it up to Earlestown P4 (a Manchester platform) and reappearing at Huyton Jn.
Must be one of the very few times the Ince Moss curve has been used for a passenger train (unless it went up to Wigan and reversed).
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y52216/2019/03/12/advanced

Happened a few times for Northern services, some Victoria/Airports in the early AC days did just that during disruptions. Don't think TPE sign it and we certainly don't at VT.

 

[Starmill]

Though whether you'd want to is for debate

I'd always want to split a journey that long up at New St anyway.

It will probably be quite palatable in a /3 or /4. It may be tolerable in a /1 provided you sit on a seat with a replacement cushion. The less said about doing that journey on a /2, the better.

With a broad range of services offering a £12 Liverpool to London ticket I am sure they will make sales. That price seems very competitive with Megabus and National Express.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It will probably be quite palatable in a /3 or /4. It may be tolerable in a /1 provided you sit on a seat with a replacement cushion. The less said about doing that journey on a /2, the better.

I dunno, I spent, it appears, about 3 hours on this 350/2:

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/P69122/2019/03/17

...yesterday evening (OK, I got out and walked around for a bit at Harrow more to alleviate boredom than anything else), and my backside was nowhere *near* as numb as was caused by the 2 hours on the Class 800 that preceded it. It did help that I had a bay of 6 to myself, though.

With a broad range of services offering a £12 Liverpool to London ticket I am sure they will make sales. That price seems very competitive with Megabus and National Express.

Yes, I would expect so - it might hit VTWC round the edges, but the main market it's going for is coaches and the likes of students driving old bangers.

FWIW I'd do it if they keep the 2+1 1st in the 350/4s and the fare the same as it is now, and advertise which diagrams are which (or run the 8-car diagrams as one of each so they all have one). That said, from Bletchley I need a change anyway (the through service other than early morning/late evening is EUS-LBZ-MKC only) and so it might as well be at New St for a cup of tea and a butty.

 

[E6007]

I dunno, I spent, it appears, about 3 hours on this 350/2:

That said, from Bletchley I need a change anyway (the through service other than early morning/late evening is EUS-LBZ-MKC only) and so it might as well be at New St for a cup of tea and a butty.

Is it? I thought Bletchley was only skipped in the peak. During the day it's LBZ and all stations to Coventry at least

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is it? I thought Bletchley was only skipped in the peak. During the day it's LBZ and all stations to Coventry at least

Yep:

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...10/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=pax-calls&order=wtt

It's Watford not Leighton sorry, e.g.:

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/P44767/2019/06/10/advanced

 

[DarloRich]

I wonder if there are any changes to the Marston Vale line. Checks. No.

At least the main line connections have been preserved ( subject to the 0713 shuffle)

 

[RealTrains07]

Anyone concerned their might be a shortage of 350s since the 350/4s wont be arriving for a while??

 

[sufian123]

Anyone concerned their might be a shortage of 350s since the 350/4s wont be arriving for a while??

Well They are using more 319s on the local runs. So that’ll free up some 350s for timebeing.

 

[nuneatonmark]

List of services along the Trent Valley with scheduled for 8 coaches from May

Sunday services from Crewe
0952
1001
1216
1316
1416
1516
1616
1716
1816
1933
Sunday services from Euston
0855
1053
1243
1343
1443
1543
1646
1743
1843
1947
Saturday services from Crewe
0538
0624
0833
0933
1033
1133
1233
1333
1433
1533
1633
1733
2038
Saturday services from Euston
0746
0846
0946
1046
1146
1246
1346
1446
1546
1646
1746
1846
Monday – Friday services from Euston
0846
0946
1046
1146
1246
1646
1746
1846
Monday – Friday services from Crewe
0547
0714
1133
1233
1332
1433
1533
1935
2153

The most obvious ‘mistake’ is the 1546 from London, always packed, I have queried it.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

List of services along the Trent Valley with scheduled for 8 coaches from May

Sunday services from Crewe
0952
1001
1216
1316
1416
1516
1616
1716
1816
1933
Sunday services from Euston
0855
1053
1243
1343
1443
1543
1646
1743
1843
1947
Saturday services from Crewe
0538
0624
0833
0933
1033
1133
1233
1333
1433
1533
1633
1733
2038
Saturday services from Euston
0746
0846
0946
1046
1146
1246
1346
1446
1546
1646
1746
1846
Monday – Friday services from Euston
0846
0946
1046
1146
1246
1646
1746
1846
Monday – Friday services from Crewe
0547
0714
1133
1233
1332
1433
1533
1935
2153

The most obvious ‘mistake’ is the 1546 from London, always packed, I have queried it.

So, more than nothing, but far from all. Hmm, not massively satisfactory. I'm happy I'm not (no longer) the one waiting years and years for this!