May 2019 timetable changes

[agbrs_Jack]

Northern have no excuse not to reinstate a peak service for Congleton after removing it in May 18 as well as introducing the many-years-late hourly Sunday services.

 

[Greybeard33]

In the TfN document there's an appendix 1 of "schemes to discuss with Northern." Would I be right in assuming that these are aspirations rather than commitments of any kind?

Regarding the Appendix 1 schemes, the TfN report states:

5.9
The next stage in the process, working directly with both operators, will be to review the revenue and cost implications of each scheme. This will allow a short list of schemes that could be affordable within the [Service Option Scheme] Fund to be drawn up. This information and any available options will be provided to the Rail North Committee for further review and approval.

So only the funding (which I guess is very limited) is committed at this stage, not any of the individual schemes.

 

[swt_passenger]

You'll need to remind me what STAR is as never heard of it...

I think STAR is the shorthand for Lea Valley third track, comes from STratford to Angel Road. That naming predates the proposed Angel Road closure and replacement with Meridian Water of course.

 

[swt_passenger]

Is there a draft timetable / consultation publicly available for Northern's May 2019 changes or is it just a case of waiting for the bad (hopefully not bad but I'm losing said hope) news?

It would be odd to have yet another consultation for something that should have already happened, which has already been through all the correct industry processes, franchise consultations, ITTs etc, etc...

 

[agbrs_Jack]

It would be odd to have yet another consultation for something that should have already happened, which has already been through all the correct industry processes, franchise consultations, ITTs etc, etc...

I suppose so, but northern completely ignored the April 2016 service level commitments for Congleton and are still breaking it, I'm not massively hopeful for decent changes!

 

[dk1]

I think STAR is the shorthand for Lea Valley third track, comes from STratford to Angel Road. That naming predates the proposed Angel Road closure and replacement with Meridian Water of course.

Ahh yes I recall. Thanks.

 

[James321]

The Ipswich service will extended to Norwich operated by new Bombardier class 720?

 

[Greybeard33]

Northern have no excuse not to reinstate a peak service for Congleton after removing it in May 18 as well as introducing the many-years-late hourly Sunday services.

The TSRs include an evening peak extra to Congleton and Stoke. I expect Northern's excuse is that Network Rail could not provide a path.

Under the old timetable, the 17:10 Deansgate to Stoke departed Piccadilly at 17:18, the same time as the 16:55 Manchester Airport to Cleethorpes. The latter had a Fast line route to Slade Lane Jn, while the Stoke train used the Slow line, so there was no conflict. But now, the Slow line is occupied by the 14:48 Barrow to Airport (dep Picc 17:17) and the 14:55 Middlesbrough to Airport (dep. Picc 17:21). The 17:21 Picc to Macclesfield has to follow the Cleethorpes train up the Fast line to Slade Lane. Consequently it does not arrive at Macc until 17:51, 4 minutes later than under the old timetable. This is only 4 minutes ahead of the 16:35 Picc to Euston, leaving insufficient headway for the stopper to continue to Congleton without holding up the following express.

I doubt that it will be possible to sort this out in the May 2019 timetable. So yet...

...another example of the Ordsall Chord business case not being worth the paper it was written on.

 

[agbrs_Jack]

The TSRs include an evening peak extra to Congleton and Stoke. I expect Northern's excuse is that Network Rail could not provide a path.

Under the old timetable, the 17:10 Deansgate to Stoke departed Piccadilly at 17:18, the same time as the 16:55 Manchester Airport to Cleethorpes. The latter had a Fast line route to Slade Lane Jn, while the Stoke train used the Slow line, so there was no conflict. But now, the Slow line is occupied by the 14:48 Barrow to Airport (dep Picc 17:17) and the 14:55 Middlesbrough to Airport (dep. Picc 17:21). The 17:21 Picc to Macclesfield has to follow the Cleethorpes train up the Fast line to Slade Lane. Consequently it does not arrive at Macc until 17:51, 4 minutes later than under the old timetable. This is only 4 minutes ahead of the 16:35 Picc to Euston, leaving insufficient headway for the stopper to continue to Congleton without holding up the following express.

I doubt that it will be possible to sort this out in the May 2019 timetable. So yet...

Exactly what Northern said. Could skip the lower usage stations (Prestbury / Adlington) and even Cheadle Hulme (as it has one at 1701, 1738 and the Stoke one at 1744) to enable it to get to Macclesfield, then as the commitments states, run it fast Congleton to Stoke as Kidsgrove is not required.
Congleton is the busiest CHU-SOT not inclusive and excluding Macclesfield, but is constantly overlooked and ignored.

Also, does the Airport really need both those services?
Especially as the 1734 to Crewe is all stations to the Airport anyway.

 

[Sandfield]

Is the postponed TPE Liverpool to Glasgow service expected to start in May?

 

[Greybeard33]

Exactly what Northern said. Could skip the lower usage stations (Prestbury / Adlington) and even Cheadle Hulme (as it has one at 1701, 1738 and the Stoke one at 1744) to enable it to get to Macclesfield, then as the commitments states, run it fast Congleton to Stoke as Kidsgrove is not required.
Congleton is the busiest CHU-SOT not inclusive and excluding Macclesfield, but is constantly overlooked and ignored.

Also, does the Airport really need both those services?
Especially as the 1734 to Crewe is all stations to the Airport anyway.

Robbing Peter to pay Paul? I think there would be uproar if that train skipped Cheadle Hulme, having seen the numbers who disembark there. And, as you say, that would leave a 37 minute gap between successive services from Picc to Cheadle Hulme (for which the TSR specifies 4tph), in the middle of the evening peak.

Barrow and Middlesbrough had direct services to the Airport before May 2018. It is the retiming/rerouting of those services, as part of the Ordsall Chord timetable fiasco, that has caused the conflict.

 

[agbrs_Jack]

Robbing Peter to pay Paul? I think there would be uproar if that train skipped Cheadle Hulme, having seen the numbers who disembark there. And, as you say, that would leave a 37 minute gap between successive services from Picc to Cheadle Hulme (for which the TSR specifies 4tph), in the middle of the evening peak.

Barrow and Middlesbrough had direct services to the Airport before May 2018. It is the retiming/rerouting of those services, as part of the Ordsall Chord timetable fiasco, that has caused the conflict.

Northern blamed the Bolton electrification fiasco.
However I saw the timetable before it was delayed and changed and it was still to be cut back to MAC (as it was to become a BPN-MAC, which now isn’t happening anyway) this service was always being cut to MAC.

So you suggest it’s better that Cheadle have a 20m gap and we have to deal with an hour wait, rather thank making it ~30m (bearing in mind it’s the ONLY additional peak CNG train) for us and 37 for CHU (when there are plenty of trains to CHU. Seems that breaking CNG’s TSR is fine but any other stations’ completely unacceptable!

Still, skipping PBY, ADC and KDG should be enough to get it out the way in time.

And I think you’ll find ‘Paul’ is owed a decent service after having many cuts despite high passenger numbers.
Why should Adlington get a better service than us? Never seen more than 8 alight!

 

[Greybeard33]

Is the postponed TPE Liverpool to Glasgow service expected to start in May?

See Post #15 above:

Following consultation with Transport for the North, TPE have now bid the May 2019 timetable to Network Rail, to include the Liverpool to Glasgow services using brand new Nova 2 trains.

Follow the TPE Class 397 thread for updates on whether the trains will be ready in time!

 

[Alfie1014]

None of the GA enhancements due to happen in May will now happen. The only exception is two additional services each way between Norwich & Liverpool St in 90mins (56mins from Ipswich) which hopefully will be operated by x2 755 bimode units obviously with no 1st class or catering.

This my understanding too, though in finding paths for these headline services there will be scores of changes to other services as a consequence to make the plan work.

 

[Mathew S]

Regarding the Appendix 1 schemes, the TfN report states:

So only the funding (which I guess is very limited) is committed at this stage, not any of the individual schemes.

Thanks for clarifying.

I had an interesting conversation with Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham yesterday, about Northern & the May '19 timetable. I'll post when I can (once I've permission from my boss).

 

[Greybeard33]

Northern blamed the Bolton electrification fiasco.
However I saw the timetable before it was delayed and changed and it was still to be cut back to MAC (as it was to become a BPN-MAC, which now isn’t happening anyway) this service was always being cut to MAC.

So you suggest it’s better that Cheadle have a 20m gap and we have to deal with an hour wait, rather thank making it ~30m (bearing in mind it’s the ONLY additional peak CNG train) for us and 37 for CHU (when there are plenty of trains to CHU. Seems that breaking CNG’s TSR is fine but any other stations’ completely unacceptable!

It suited the industry to blame the Bolton electrification delay for the timetable chaos, but IMO there would still have been chaos if the wires had been ready and the originally-bid May 2018 timetable had been implemented. That is why the South Manchester enhancements have been cut back in what is now proposed for May 2019.

The 17:21 is the only evening peak extra to Cheadle Hulme. Now the Blackpool - Macclesfield service has been binned, the May 2019 timetable will not comply with the TSR for Cheadle Hulme, Bramhall, Poynton and Macclesfield. And on the Mid-Cheshire, Altrincham, Hale, Knutsford, Northwich and Greenbank have all lost the promised additional services to Stockport and Piccadilly. Congleton is not the only station to suffer, although I suppose it seems even worse to lose a service you previously had.

 

[pemma]

The 17:21 is the only evening peak extra to Cheadle Hulme. Now the Blackpool - Macclesfield service has been binned, the May 2019 timetable will not comply with the TSR for Cheadle Hulme, Bramhall, Poynton and Macclesfield. And on the Mid-Cheshire, Altrincham, Hale, Knutsford, Northwich and Greenbank have all lost the promised additional services to Stockport and Piccadilly. Congleton is not the only station to suffer, although I suppose it seems even worse to lose a service you previously had.

Yet Northern have submitted a new application to Network Rail again requesting to run Greenbank-Manchester and to extend the peak time Stockport only services to Manchester.

Blackpool North services will go to Hazel Grove, not Macclesfield with an exception of an 2 daily services from Stoke to Macclesfield in the northbound direction only. However, Sunday services are still set to be Stoke to Blackpool (15 services in each direction.) Also, for the benefit of @agbrs_Jack there is a request to run an additional service to Congleton and Stoke in the evening peak, as well as one additional off-peak service.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/indus...on-operating-companies/sale-of-access-rights/

 

[agbrs_Jack]

Yet Northern have submitted a new application to Network Rail again requesting to run Greenbank-Manchester and to extend the peak time Stockport only services to Manchester.

Blackpool North services will go to Hazel Grove, not Macclesfield with an exception of an 2 daily services from Stoke to Macclesfield in the northbound direction only. However, Sunday services are still set to be Stoke to Blackpool (15 services in each direction.) Also, for the benefit of @agbrs_Jack there is a request to run an additional service to Congleton and Stoke in the evening peak, as well as one additional off-peak service.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/indus...on-operating-companies/sale-of-access-rights/

Thank you very much!
They must've added that Current ARN consultation as it wasn't there yesterday!

 

[xtradj]

So Liverpool to New St two hourly

Will now be Liverpool to Euston via New St once an hour

And Liverpool to Birmingham International once an hour?

 

[js1000]

Resolving the Northern situation is the priority. Passenger numbers are nose-diving thanks to poor punctuality, increased cancellations (resulting from longer distance journeys) and more irregular calling intervals at commuter stations.

It is commonly said that Northern Connect will be a panacea for turning the Northern franchise into a profitable, modern network that people will want to use. I was always sceptical and after the shambolic May timetable I am even more adverse to the idea now - as TfTN appear to have also intimated by reviewing Northern Connect routes. It's a huge risk.

 

[BluePenguin]

So Liverpool to New St two hourly

Will now be Liverpool to Euston via New St once an hour

And Liverpool to Birmingham International once an hour?

O dear this is not what I expected and very disappointed if this is really true. I hope not!

I thought Crew - Euston was going to be extended to Liverpool, running non stop on the direct line between Crew and Stafford. When there was mention of Birmingham I thought than 1tph Liverpool - Birmingham would be scrapped and the carriages used to prove more seats on the above route.

Currently the connections are not possible as both trains arrive at Stafford at the same time, fixing this should be a priority. Simply extending the slow service to Birmingham New Street make it much less appealing in comparison.

 

[47421]

The Hertford East and Southend enhancements on their own may be minor but the timetable will need some degree of reworking anyway to make these extra services fit with the rest of the timetable (e.g. Liverpool Street platforming) which is why delaying the improvements until a later date is probably wise. Plus there's the additional traincrew diagrams etc needed to run the extra services meaning there's far more to it than 10 or so extra trains to each from a certain date.

So why did GA commit to it in Franchise Agreement? And if they cannot deliver on these little improvements what chance the others promised?

My view - GA is a rerun of VTEC. Revenue projections wrong from day one, promised / needed infrastructure improvements (platforms in GA case) not delivered, new trains late, timetable improvements not delivered, shareholder support drawn down unexpectedly. Time will tell but won't surprise me if franchise does not run its course.

STAR is Stratford Tottenham Angel Road - originally due Dec 18 delayed to May 19. As discussed on other thread, will be interesting to see how timetable will work. Should be 2 TPH in addition to current service but with a 15 min running time looks like will need 2 units with 30 mins sat in stations each hour and given the new line is a siding most of that layover will have to be at Stratford with units passing between Lea Bridge and Stratford.

Thanks to posters for the detail on TPE / Northern. Anyone got similar info on what should be happening on Scotrail?

 

[dk1]

So why did GA commit to it in Franchise Agreement? And if they cannot deliver on these little improvements what chance the others promised?

My view - GA is a rerun of VTEC. Revenue projections wrong from day one, promised / needed infrastructure improvements (platforms in GA case) not delivered, new trains late, timetable improvements not delivered, shareholder support drawn down unexpectedly. Time will tell but won't surprise me if franchise does not run its course.

STAR is Stratford Tottenham Angel Road - originally due Dec 18 delayed to May 19. As discussed on other thread, will be interesting to see how timetable will work. Should be 2 TPH in addition to current service but with a 15 min running time looks like will need 2 units with 30 mins sat in stations each hour and given the new line is a siding most of that layover will have to be at Stratford with units passing between Lea Bridge and Stratford.

Thanks to posters for the detail on TPE / Northern. Anyone got similar info on what should be happening on Scotrail?

Oddly enough I recall reading about STAR in MR magazine. Unless you work on the West I doubt many GA employees know anything about it.

 

[Mathew S]

Reading through the track access application, it seems that Northern's plan is for the Blackpool - Man Airport 319 service (currently via Wigan) and the Cumbria - Man Airport services (currently via Bolton) to swap routes south of Preston; so that the electrics will run via Bolton. That's a start, though from a purely personal point of view I hope they improve the reliability of the Cumbria services, as it looks like I'll be using those for my daily commute from May.

 

[Greybeard33]

Yet Northern have submitted a new application to Network Rail again requesting to run Greenbank-Manchester and to extend the peak time Stockport only services to Manchester.

Blackpool North services will go to Hazel Grove, not Macclesfield with an exception of an 2 daily services from Stoke to Macclesfield in the northbound direction only. However, Sunday services are still set to be Stoke to Blackpool (15 services in each direction.) Also, for the benefit of @agbrs_Jack there is a request to run an additional service to Congleton and Stoke in the evening peak, as well as one additional off-peak service.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/indus...on-operating-companies/sale-of-access-rights/

Things seem to have changed since the October TfN document I quoted in post #15. It is noteworthy that, in the November and December Rail North Committee meetings, the press and public were excluded from the Train Service Planning discussions.

Contrary to my supposition in #25, the draft ARN Supplemental Track Access Agreement does include an hourly Leeds to Manchester Airport service, via Bradford, the Calder Valley and the Ordsall Chord. It also includes a 4th hourly service between Piccadilly and Hazel Grove.

The draft document jcollins linked is not yet a formal track access application to the ORR, pending consideration by the Sale of Access Rights panel. It is published for consultation until 25 Jan 2019. Section 3.2, Terms not agreed with the facility owner, explains its current status:

ARN and Network Rail are working together towards submitting a S22 application to ORR.
A position paper was submitted to SOAR in December 2018 and the informal feedback was that Network Rail have concerns regarding the performance of services operating over the Castlefield corridor. Network Rail has indicated that it would not be prepared to support additional firm access rights over this corridor. ARN have not yet received anything formally from Network Rail to advise of this. In May 18 ARN introduced additional services over the Castlefield corridor, in addition to the services in the December 2017 base, which are currently operating with firm rights. The services introduced in May 18 which operate over this corridor are running with contingent rights which will fall away in May 2019. ARN is committed to working with Network Rail to improve performance in the corridor, and are also engaged in wider industry discussions in relation to strategic performance matters in the Manchester area.
There are a small number of services which ARN are committed to run as per the TSR from May ’19 which Network Rail have expressed concerns with as follows:
- A proposed uplift in service between Chester and Altrincham on Mondays to Saturdays, and between Chester and Manchester Piccadilly on Sundays – This is due to Level Crossing concerns
- A proposed uplift in the daytime service on the Atherton line from 3 trains an hour to 4 trains an hour – This is due to Network Rail concerns over performance in the Central Manchester area, The uplift to 4 trains per hour has been offered back as per the May 19 timetable, however Network Rail has expressed concern over performance in the Central Manchester area
- Services over the Castlefield corridor due to performance concerns – All of the services which ARN have bid for over this corridor have been offered with the exception of the extra peak time Bolton- Oxford Road services (additional to the standard hour). All the services are currently running (and have been since May ’18 and therefore May 2019 timetable will not be increasing any quantum on this corridor only changes to origin and destination pairs which is due to the completion of the Bolton electrification infrastructure. This new infrastructure will allow ARN to operate the originally envisaged service structure which could not be implemented due to the infrastructure delay.
It should be noted that ARN is committed to working with Network Rail to fully understand and address any performance or safety concerns. We are however still seeking to obtain the necessary access rights in the meantime whilst work continues with Network Rail to resolve concerns and find suitable paths.
ARN is keen to secure access rights over these areas of the network in order for ARN to meet the full TSR 2 as specified in the franchise. Given the volume of changes contained 16th SA, ARN is concerned that waiting until after the January SoAR Panel to formally consult the application risks compromising the time the ORR and the industry will have to formally review the application prior to the 2019 Subsidiary Change Date.
With this in mind, the parties have launched the consultation prior to obtaining formal Network Rail endorsement. It is hoped that we will be able to achieve a S22 application prior to informal submission to ORR.

There seem to be some inconsistencies in the document regarding the Castlefield corridor. Before May 2018, Northern operated 4tph through Piccadilly (2tph to Blackpool, 1tph to Southport and 1tph to Liverpool). Now it is 6tph (2tph to Blackpool, 1tph to Preston/Barrow, 1tph to Wigan NW and 2tph to Liverpool). Section 3.2 above says that this will not increase in May 2019, yet elsewhere the document indicates that the bid is for 7tph (2tph to Blackpool via Chorley, 1tph to Barrow/Windermere via Golborne, 1tph to Wigan NW, 2tph to Liverpool and 1tph to Leeds via Bradford). Perhaps the Airport - Leeds service is contingent on diversion of the TfW N Wales service to Victoria?

I am also puzzled that Network Rail has apparently declined to offer rights for the additional Mid-Cheshire line services (uplift from 1tph to 2tph on Mon-Sat and from 1tp2h to 1tph on Sundays) "due to level crossing concerns". Presumably this relates to the busy crossing over Ashley Road in Hale, rather than either the relatively quiet one at Mobberley, or the various farm crossings. But road traffic can divert to the nearby bridge on Hale Road, while pedestrians can use the footbridge in Hale station. And on Sundays, when the road traffic is less anyway, there would be no more trains than there already are Mon-Sat!

 

[pemma]

I am also puzzled that Network Rail has apparently declined to offer rights for the additional Mid-Cheshire line services (uplift from 1tph to 2tph on Mon-Sat and from 1tp2h to 1tph on Sundays) "due to level crossing concerns". Presumably this relates to the busy crossing over Ashley Road in Hale, rather than either the relatively quiet one at Mobberley, or the various farm crossings. But road traffic can divert to the nearby bridge on Hale Road, while pedestrians can use the footbridge in Hale station. And on Sundays, when the road traffic is less anyway, there would be no more trains than there already are Mon-Sat!

Plus there's more freight on weekdays and freight trains cause the level crossing barriers to be down for longer than passenger trains.

 

[The Planner]

More people about at weekends that wouldn't always be about in the day due to school, work. It could push the level crossing risk score up to a point where it triggers something having to be done, which costs money.

 

[pemma]

More people about at weekends that wouldn't always be about in the day due to school, work. It could push the level crossing risk score up to a point where it triggers something having to be done, which costs money.

Yet Network Rail haven't had any issues with North Wales to Manchester services diverting via Altrincham while engineering works are happening which results in 3tp2h on Sundays during engineering works but seem to have an issue with 2tp2h every Sunday.

 

[Bikeman78]

I guess it's time to start up the next thread about timetable changes. For me the questions are - will Chester to Leeds and Chester to Liverpool (via the Halton curve) services start running? Will TPE Manchester Scotland services transition to run via Bolton, and will they stop at Bolton (and with any set down/pick up restrictions)?

Currently they take 40 minutes non stop from Preston to Piccadilly non stop via Eccles. It will be hard to beat that via Bolton so it's pontless going that way if they aren't going to stop.

 

[Greybeard33]

More people about at weekends that wouldn't always be about in the day due to school, work. It could push the level crossing risk score up to a point where it triggers something having to be done, which costs money.

The level crossing in Hale is on the main shopping street in the centre of the village, near several large schools. In the Mon-Fri morning peak, when there are already 2tphpd, kids on their way to school run/cycle across the crossing as the barriers are coming down. The road is much quieter on Sundays when the shops and schools are closed.