Even if we
must have a regular service from Leeds to Glasgow via Carlisle, I'm not sure that the S&C is the best way to do it.
Running via Bentham permits more fast running on the WCML. Running via Burnley permits even more fast running on the WCML (with the added bonus of service Bradford/ Halifax/ Burnley/ Blackburn/ Preston/ Lancaster).
You could probably get a direct Leeds - Carlisle - Glasgow journey time matching the four hour duration of the XC service if you run via Huddersfield/
Manchester/ Bolton/ Preston/ Lancaster (and serving a lot more intermediate population than Settle/ Appleby!)
Through passenger usage in the past was clealy limited, but rail travel numbers have shot up since 2000, and we've only had one half-hearted attempt at a limited-stop Leeds-Glasgow through service in the mid-2000s (does anyone know how these loaded?) before that was nixed.
Sorry for repeating myself, but we do have direct Leeds - Glasgow services, every couple of hours.
They seem to be an inconvenient truth for a few people of this thread who'd like to pretend that the S&C is the only possible way of getting between the cities.
If the argument is that these services are too busy (and that's a fair point!) then why don't we throw resources at the XC services via York/ Newcastle/ Edinburgh? These are the ones that are so busy but people on here seem contented to do nothing about them whilst throwing resources at speculative "built it and they might come" services through the middle of nowhere (rather than increasing the number of seats on a busy service that serves large cities).
Given how busy the XC services are, even if you run a Leeds - Carlisle - Glasgow service every hour, it will only take a fraction of those passengers away from the current Voyager route.
If operators promoted diversions over the S&C they would get extra passengers booking for a scenic day out
In theory but there's then be complaints about the lack of Advance tickets for a tenner and complaints that the windows on the 390s weren't big enough to appreciate Ribblehead... and why aren't the trains a traditional blue/grey livery...
At the end of the day, a long direct train is more preferable than a quicker RRB IMO
I'm sure most on here would agree, and probably a lot of regular members of the public would say they were happy on a longer train ride, but is there any evidence of actual passenger behaviour (e.g. being prepared to sit on a longer train when a coach is scheduled to get there an hour earlier)? I can see people saying they are happy to sit on a longer train in theory but people say a lot of nice things when completing opinion polls (e.g. most people say that they are happy to pay more tax then vote for a political party that promises to cut taxes).
I've often wondered if electrification should have continued from Skipton to Hellifield using (extended bay platforms). Of course, Hellifield is far too small to warrant investment in infrastructure to facilitate an electric service on present population and passenger numbers, but it could become part of the Leeds commuter belt and perhaps a frequent electrified link would cause that development, just like with the Southern railway did for London commuters. Thoughts?
I've suggested, in the past, something simple/basic like a 153 shuttling from Skipton to Settle to provide regular connections with the Leeds/Bradford EMUs (although the track-work means you'd have to go much further north for the next points).
I've similarly suggested using a DMU to do a Skipton - Hellifield - Clitheroe service (connecting with the Blackburn/Manchester trains) but the general response was along the lines of not being interested in practical/cheap improvements (which would give people simple connections etc) because the focus should be on daydreaming about going back to the glory days of Thames Clyde Expresses and all that
(* - there was also an issue with the current points at Hellifield requiring work on them to permit reversals IIRC)