May 2025 Timetable Change - Confirmed Changes Only

[Johnny Lewis]

According to RTT, existing trains currently running between King's Cross and Forster Square will continue to operate as the present schedule & stopping pattern (including Shipley Platform 3) after the timetable change, including 1A26▪ and 1D30 on Sundays.

Additional trains
London – Bradford

Sundays

KGX 14:03▪︎ (calling principal stations)
BDQ 17:31▪︎ (GRA & SVG)

Mondays to Saturdays
EVERY TWO HOURS
These trains call at PBO

KGX 07:03 09:03 11:03 13:03 15:03▪︎
(unadvertised call at Shipley Platform 4)

BDQ (P1) 11:17 13:17 15:16 17:16 19:15▪︎
(the 19:15▪︎ doesn't call at Shipley)

▪︎ InterCity 225

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Jan 2025 ==


That's not unusual at Shipley. At present, the Bradford – Leeds stopper can't leave until the Leeds – Skipton local has arrived at platform 2. The Bradford – Skipton arrives early as dwell time is longer on platform 5.

All the various media channels that have picked up on this story have (presumably incorrectly) stated that there will be 6 trains each way between Bradford and London on Sundays, whereas I think it's only been LNER's intention to add a single additional train in each direction on Sundays.
However, if there are still 4 Grand Central trains each way on Sundays, I suppose there ARE 6 trains in total each way between Bradford and London. Just not 6 LNER trains.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Jan 2025 ==

Interestingly, whilst pretty much the entirety of GWR is in, no trains are showing on the Newquay branch for the Whitsun bank holiday weekend... Hope it's just an incomplete upload.

The splitting of services and breaking of connections at Exeter is a little bit rubbish though.

The Sunday service is currently being re-bid. The reason given for this is due to delays in the completion of the upgrade works on the Newquay branch (including the reinstatement of the second platform at Newquay).
I'm guessing there will now also need to be changes to the weekday and Saturday services that have previously been bid, so we may not get the hourly service that was promised.
I assume this is why ALL trains running to and from Newquay have temporarily been pulled from online systems.
So we need to be patient!

 

[Starmill]

Not as bad as TfW splitting South Wales to Manchester because the trains they decided to use for some Manchester services cannot do the full route on a tank of fuel. At least this is about training and getting more trains into service.

Which stock is unusually low on fuel range?

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Which stock is unusually low on fuel range?

67s I believe.

 

[Hugo3000]

That’s the way it always should’ve been. That must be the first direct connection between Bradford and Lancaster for a long time

If I remember correctly there was one train a day York (or Leeds?) to Barrow via Bradford Interchange and Preston in the afternoon around 2018?

 

[voyagerdude220]

If I remember correctly there was one train a day York (or Leeds?) to Barrow via Bradford Interchange and Preston in the afternoon around 2018?

You're correct. 15:57 from Leeds, although I can't remember if it originated from York or Leeds.

 

[Topological]

67s I believe.

Correct. I do not know how true it is that the 67s cannot do a diagram including Swansea to Manchester return, but there is no diagram which does that.

The closest is Cardiff - Swansea - Manchester - Cardiff. However had that train continued to Swansea it would then need to get back to Canton and that must be the barrier.

Splitting diagrams at Cardiff is very messy because Central is not designed for so many terminating trains. It is the Mk4 sets that have created the split.

The connections have been restored recently, but we had a long time where the connections did not work and even where they did it would be common to arrive in Cardiff just as the Swansea bound train was departing owing to the pressures on platforms created by splitting the service.

It is perhaps unsurprising that Exeter splits are having issues. The situation at Exeter is almost the same as Cardiff, albeit in the Cardiff case 3 and 4 are interchangeable where at Exeter they are not letting one half arrive on 5 just before the other leaves from 6 and treating 5 and 6 as interchangeable. (Although I go to Exeter a lot, I cannot remember whether 6 could accommodate the same length trains as 5 does - would a 9 car XC or a 10-car GWR fit in 6 if there happened to be half of the Cardiff-Penzance in 5 at the time that XC or GWR would have used 5)

 

[Jimini]

a 9 car XC

A what now?

 

[Topological]

A what now?

Quite regular in Exeter, just the Manchester to Reading axis does not seem to get them.

 

[Jrocks]

(Although I go to Exeter a lot, I cannot remember whether 6 could accommodate the same length trains as 5 does - would a 9 car XC or a 10-car GWR fit in 6 if there happened to be half of the Cardiff-Penzance in 5 at the time that XC or GWR would have used 5)

5 and 6 can both fit the longest trains that GW/XC run, infact 6 is the longest platform at the station! A few differences between the platforms:

6 has a large curve whereas 5 is straight.

If you are coming into 6 from the west, the signal is approach controlled, slowing the entry.

6 has a 20mph limit, 5 has a 45mph limit.

 

[Topological]

5 and 6 can both fit the longest trains that GW/XC run, infact 6 is the longest platform at the station! A few differences between the platforms:

6 has a large curve whereas 5 is straight.

If you are coming into 6 from the west, the signal is approach controlled, slowing the entry.

6 has a 20mph limit, 5 has a 45mph limit.

So nominally you could have a situation where

1. The train from Cardiff arrives in 6 leaving 5 free
2. The train from Penzance arrives in 5
3. Passengers transfer from 5 to 6 and the Cardiff departs
4. 6 is now free and can be used until the Penzance departs again

This may mean flexing the timetable but would only see 5 and 6 in use simultaneously for a short amount of time (as they would be anyway when the Cardiff to Penzance is a through train)

I am sure they thought about it, but it would seem that appropriate use of platforms would allow connections.

 

[Jrocks]

That could potentially work, however that does mean a minimum of 6 minutes from arrival of one to the departure of the next.

That may be ok in the 'up' direction departing Exeter, however you then have the bottlenecks of Weston, Bristol and Cardiff to ensure they slot into.

In the 'down' direction, that would potentially mean retiming Paignton services as the Penzance service would have to leave later. That could also then have a knock onto Okehampton services and also in a very few circumstances, down XC services which are right behind a stopper by the time they reach Newton.

That's all before we have delays and have to start holding services for connections, knocking even more delays into what will now be a very congested Exeter.

 

[Topological]

Looking at the current timetable the train towards Cardiff is at 53 and the train towards Penzance is at 25. This is about as bad as it could be.

However, let us assume that the train from Penzance arrives into 6 at 52 minutes past. The train to Cardiff is sitting in 5 and ready to leave a few minutes later. Platform 5 is then free. Platform 6 is occupied.

At 14 minutes past there is a Paddington train on 5. This is no problem since 5 is free.

At 24 minutes past a train from Cardiff arrives into 5, 5 and 6 are then both occupied. Soon after the Penzance train clears 6

At 43 minutes past there is a Paddington train but that has to use 6 because 5 is in use.

The problem here is the CrossCountry which should use 5 at 27 minutes past. Pushing that through earlier would require an earlier departure from Plymouth (which is doable since there is a long layover at Plymouth). Pushing the Cross Country through after the Penzance has cleared 6 is also doable, but then brings into play more issues with Bristol and means removing the recovery time built in at Temple Meads (trains usually stop for 10 minutes).

If something could be done to get the arrival from Cardiff in at about 18 minutes past and the Penzance train to clear 6 at 24 minutes past then the space would be there for the CrossCountry to run through platform 6.

Either way, this is not what they are doing with the timings.

 

[InkyScrolls]

That’s the way it always should’ve been. That must be the first direct connection between Bradford and Lancaster for a long time

Northern weren't able to get the path before (they've been trying!).

 

[43055]

Quite regular in Exeter, just the Manchester to Reading axis does not seem to get them.

They do get them. Normally 2 or 3 a day in each direction.

 

[Jason White]

Just to add to my Cross Country based post from last night- I've just also noticed the additional calls at Worcestershire Parkway- seems to be (on Weekdays) every hour on the Plymouth to Scotland workings northbound, but it's the Manchester to Bristol services which call southbound.

Good to see that CrossCountry has finally seen the potential of Worcestershire Parkway. However the skeptic in me thinks it's more to do with eradicating the associated paperwork surrounding special stop orders due to the frequent cancellations to Cardiff and Nottingham. Having a through and fast service to Bristol together with two trains an hour to Birmingham and Cheltenham is a vast improvement on the current offer. Shame they'll probably be within 15 minutes of one another. West Midlands Railway needs to terminate some of its Snow Hill services at WOP HL. Having a link into North Worcestershire would be beneficial. Something for a future timetable change hopefully?

 

[JRT]

Very conveniently for me, 2H03, the 0641 from Bradford to Carnforth (SuX), will from the timetable change continue in service to Lancaster! We've evidently been successful in acquiring the path.

Realtime Trains | 2H03 0641 Bradford Forster Square to Lancaster | 05/06/2025

Real-time train running information for 2H03 0641 departure from Bradford Forster Square to Lancaster on 05/06/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Pathed as Class 158/168/170/175 DMU at 90mph from Carnforth.

 

[Jrocks]

Looking at the current timetable the train towards Cardiff is at 53 and the train towards Penzance is at 25. This is about as bad as it could be.

However, let us assume that the train from Penzance arrives into 6 at 52 minutes past. The train to Cardiff is sitting in 5 and ready to leave a few minutes later. Platform 5 is then free. Platform 6 is occupied.

At 14 minutes past there is a Paddington train on 5. This is no problem since 5 is free.

At 24 minutes past a train from Cardiff arrives into 5, 5 and 6 are then both occupied. Soon after the Penzance train clears 6

At 43 minutes past there is a Paddington train but that has to use 6 because 5 is in use.

The problem here is the CrossCountry which should use 5 at 27 minutes past. Pushing that through earlier would require an earlier departure from Plymouth (which is doable since there is a long layover at Plymouth). Pushing the Cross Country through after the Penzance has cleared 6 is also doable, but then brings into play more issues with Bristol and means removing the recovery time built in at Temple Meads (trains usually stop for 10 minutes).

If something could be done to get the arrival from Cardiff in at about 18 minutes past and the Penzance train to clear 6 at 24 minutes past then the space would be there for the CrossCountry to run through platform 6.

Either way, this is not what they are doing with the timings.

You've got it, would require a lot of flexing. Another thing that comes into play is signalling overlaps and platform reoccupation time. Won't go into any detail as that would be dragging this thread massively off topic!

 

[swt_passenger]

Quite regular in Exeter, just the Manchester to Reading axis does not seem to get them.

Except when it does. There’s only a handful of booked double units per day on the Bournemouth/Manchester route, but according to RTT 9 car pairings have run twice this week so far, and the southbound 1944 1O24 tonight is currently booked as 9 car.

 

[Jamesrob637]

They do get them. Normally 2 or 3 a day in each direction.

More than that route used to, and more doubles are scheduled from May.

 

[lookingatstell]

I haven't noticed any changes for the metro area, do we know when or even if some of the cuts in the Southern metro area will be restored?
The ones i'm thinking of is:
-The missing 2tph Victoria to Epsom (only a handful of peak services restored)
-The missing 2tph Victoria to Sutton via Selhurst services in the off peak (Restored in the peak)
- The missing 2tph SN from London Bridge along the Annerley Corridor towards Croydon (only a mere smattering of peak hour services were restored in December 2024)

Because the cuts have turned a 4tph turn up and go service in large parts of South London to a rather unattractive 2tph service and i was hoping with SN getting a cascade of 387s from GN we might see some of those cuts restored in the May 2025 timetable

I'm disappointed the Crystal Palace - London Bridge is journey is still 29 minutes... and 30 minutes to Victoria. I thought the Victoria Area Resignalling project may have reduced journey times a bit.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

West Midlands Railway needs to terminate some of its Snow Hill services at WOP HL. Having a link into North Worcestershire would be beneficial. Something for a future timetable change hopefully?

Can't see that happening without redoubling and a second high-level platform at Parkway – and if you're thinking about that, I suspect it would actually be easier to extend to Evesham or Honeybourne, with a bit of extra redoubling between Evesham and Pershore instead. (But Speculative Discussions is ——> that way)

 

[louis97]

Correct. I do not know how true it is that the 67s cannot do a diagram including Swansea to Manchester return, but there is no diagram which does that.

The closest is Cardiff - Swansea - Manchester - Cardiff. However had that train continued to Swansea it would then need to get back to Canton and that must be the barrier.

Splitting diagrams at Cardiff is very messy because Central is not designed for so many terminating trains. It is the Mk4 sets that have created the split.

There are timetabling constraints involved in running all the Manchester trains through to Swansea. There are potential solutions, however they all have their own issues. The timetable pattern being two hourly does not help, if every train stopped at the same stations every hour between Cardiff and Manchester it would be far more straight forward. It would be difficult to maintain the current timetable between Cardiff and Manchester and run every train at least to/from Swansea, whilst also using the Mk4 rolling stock. With the current service pattern if you extend and turnround a currently planned Mk4 service at Swansea you put it, after a minimum turnround, onto a train which stops at Craven Arms, Church Stretton, Whitchurch and Nantwich. The Mk4 running times are slightly longer than a 197 and therefore calling at those 4 extra stations whilst also maintaining the minimum turnround at Swansea means you are quite unlikely to make it to Crewe for your path to Manchester (and potentially meeting the minimum turnround there). This also then affects the through service to/from West Wales. The alternative option to that is to sit the Mk4 at Swansea for around 75 minutes to form the next service which would not call at those stations, however that isn't really desirable from a resource utilisation and station capacity point of view. There are other options that could be done, for example amending stopping patterns for those 4 stations but then you end up with non-standard service patterns.

The splitting of the services at Cardiff is very messy and I don't think there is a perfect solution to it, at least not at this current time. One option could be to remove the Mk4 from the Manchester route and make it an entirely 197 operation, the Mk4 fleet could then be focused on the Cardiff to Holyhead route. The capacity provided (and the facilities) by the Mk4 is definitely however (I think) more valuable to the Manchester route.

And that is all before you think about any potential fuel range issue...

 

[InkyScrolls]

Pathed as Class 158/168/170/175 DMU at 90mph from Carnforth.

Interesting that. At the moment most of the through services are pathed as 150/153/156s. This one being pathed as a 158 presumably is to allow for the very tight timing between CNF and LAN (in my experience I doubt it will be attainable).

 

[Topological]

There are timetabling constraints involved in running all the Manchester trains through to Swansea. There are potential solutions, however they all have their own issues. The timetable pattern being two hourly does not help, if every train stopped at the same stations every hour between Cardiff and Manchester it would be far more straight forward. It would be difficult to maintain the current timetable between Cardiff and Manchester and run every train at least to/from Swansea, whilst also using the Mk4 rolling stock. With the current service pattern if you extend and turnround a currently planned Mk4 service at Swansea you put it, after a minimum turnround, onto a train which stops at Craven Arms, Church Stretton, Whitchurch and Nantwich. The Mk4 running times are slightly longer than a 197 and therefore calling at those 4 extra stations whilst also maintaining the minimum turnround at Swansea means you are quite unlikely to make it to Crewe for your path to Manchester (and potentially meeting the minimum turnround there). This also then affects the through service to/from West Wales. The alternative option to that is to sit the Mk4 at Swansea for around 75 minutes to form the next service which would not call at those stations, however that isn't really desirable from a resource utilisation and station capacity point of view. There are other options that could be done, for example amending stopping patterns for those 4 stations but then you end up with non-standard service patterns.

The splitting of the services at Cardiff is very messy and I don't think there is a perfect solution to it, at least not at this current time. One option could be to remove the Mk4 from the Manchester route and make it an entirely 197 operation, the Mk4 fleet could then be focused on the Cardiff to Holyhead route. The capacity provided (and the facilities) by the Mk4 is definitely however (I think) more valuable to the Manchester route.

And that is all before you think about any potential fuel range issue...

Quite

There are no timetabling constraints. The operation worked when it was 175s and then in the interim with 150s and 153s. The Mk4 are the issue because they create constraints.

Even if we accept Cardiff splits, the connections should have been made to work. At least now the connections do work. Though more effort is needed to hold the onward half when the Mk4 from Manchester is late.

From the perspective of this thread, perhaps the Exeter split will bed in somehow over time.

 

[ayubdaud]

Interesting that. At the moment most of the through services are pathed as 150/153/156s. This one being pathed as a 158 presumably is to allow for the very tight timing between CNF and LAN (in my experience I doubt it will be attainable).

Have been under the impression those services run as class 158s anyway. Being timed as class 150 may just be a historic thing if there aren't the required SRT data for a 158 for the full route.

 

[louis97]

There are no timetabling constraints. The operation worked when it was 175s and then in the interim with 150s and 153s. The Mk4 are the issue because they create constraints.

Sorry, quite right, should have said these are constraints on the timetable created by the use of the Mk4 fleet.

 

[brad465]

You've got it, would require a lot of flexing. Another thing that comes into play is signalling overlaps and platform reoccupation time. Won't go into any detail as that would be dragging this thread massively off topic!

It's a shame they didn't extend P2 at St David's in the end as I presume this would have helped in a scenario like splitting the Cardiff-Penzance services here.

 

[Southerntravel]

This is as per the current timetable due to electrification works Sunday-Thursday between Haymarket and Dalmeny.

1S45 runs to Dundee only, with an earlier 1B61 returning from there to Edinburgh.

Does this mean the Abd to PENZ is being withdrawn permanently or just between May and December timetable changes?

 

[Adam0984]

Very conveniently for me, 2H03, the 0641 from Bradford to Carnforth (SuX), will from the timetable change continue in service to Lancaster! We've evidently been successful in acquiring the path.

Realtime Trains | 2H03 0641 Bradford Forster Square to Lancaster | 05/06/2025

Real-time train running information for 2H03 0641 departure from Bradford Forster Square to Lancaster on 05/06/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

I've been told that it didn't always go into the goods loop and sometimes just went straight to Lancaster and had longer in Lancaster

You're correct. 15:57 from Leeds, although I can't remember if it originated from York or Leeds.

It came from York and was just a combination of the York to Preston and Preston to Barrow with the return working Preston to York departing a bit earlier than the normal clock face pattern because it called at all station between Preston and Blackburn

 

[InkyScrolls]

I've been told that it didn't always go into the goods loop and sometimes just went straight to Lancaster and had longer in Lancaster.

That's correct, yes. If the path is available we're usually rung by Preston D at Carnforth and asked if we're ready for a quick start and a sprightly run to Lancaster! Unfortunately we can't take the passengers with us of course. On occasions when the following ex-Barrow train has been cancelled I've asked (or asked the conductor to ask) Control if we can run in its path and take everyone with us to Lancaster; this is generally agreed to.