TransPennine Express North Route, New Timetable

[Senex]

I noticed 06:00 hadn't made it to the airport again. Looking at RTT the delay occurred slowly throughout the journey which points to a time table that isn't deliverable rather than one particular incident.

York bound train seems always to be given priority at Malton now even if Scarborough bound train is only 1 minute late, putting the 5 minute connections at Seamer in jeopardy.

TPE seem to be burying their heads in the sand and blaming every one else over the York Scarborough problems.

So why has there been so little local or national publicity on this disastrous performance of the York-Scarborough service? Why doesn't the name of TPE stink just as much as the names of Northern and GTR?

 

[Bevan Price]

So why has there been so little local or national publicity on this disastrous performance of the York-Scarborough service? Why doesn't the name of TPE stink just as much as the names of Northern and GTR?

Could be several resons, e.g.

A lot fewer people are affected than the numbers affected elsewhere.

MPs & media elsewhere are more likely to criticise anything involving the government (directly, or indirectly, as a consequence of government policy such as privatisation)

Does the London media know where Scarborough is ? Alternatively, does it realise that although Scarborough is in the north, its rail services (to/ from York) are nothing to do with Northrun.

 

[daikilo]

I have been watching the Nth TP route regularly and it certainly seems more prone to "congestion" now than before the timetable change. Certainly, anything going over the Ordsall chord is at risk as is anything going through Leeds. I am guessing there are simply too many trains to be signalled over the multiple flat junctions in these areas, and if some are even a few minutes late, the original plan goes out of the window or everything gets delayed.

As for the specifics of York-Scarborough, if inward timings simply cannot be guaranteed to be say within 10 minutes then the only solution will be to find a spare set and probably driver until it is resolved. Where from, and who should pay for it I have no idea.

 

[geoffk]

As for the specifics of York-Scarborough, if inward timings simply cannot be guaranteed to be say within 10 minutes then the only solution will be to find a spare set and probably driver until it is resolved. Where from, and who should pay for it I have no idea.

Or find the money for a second platform and bridge at Malton. Don't forget an extra hourly service is in Northern's plan. Hopefully that will go from the bay platform 2 at York.

 

[scarby]

I noticed 06:00 hadn't made it to the airport again. Looking at RTT the delay occurred slowly throughout the journey which points to a time table that isn't deliverable rather than one particular incident.

It was 9 late arriving at Manchester Airport today, with the delay again developing much in the way you describe. I am quite sure that a Monday-Friday running of this service has yet to arrive on time since the new timetable was introduced.

 

[mike57]

As for the specifics of York-Scarborough, if inward timings simply cannot be guaranteed to be say within 10 minutes then the only solution will be to find a spare set and probably driver until it is resolved. Where from, and who should pay for it I have no idea.

As for spare sets TPE had 2, the mk3s and locos, but after the disabled access furore decided not to use them. The logical use for these sets would have been on one of the Newcastle routes, as there are plenty of alternative services unlike Scarborough where a disabled person would be faced with an hours wait. I think TPE deliberately let that run so they would have a good excuse not to use them. Perhaps if they were told to obtain two replacement sets at whatever the cost they would have handled it differently. Unless TPE are hit hard financially they will not sort the problems. The hit has to be big enough to affect shareholder payments.

At the moment they have no incentive to resolve the problems, or to even raise the other issues that are affecting reliability. After all the senior management still draw the same salary even if the service is appalling unlike those of us who are hourly paid and loose money when delayed.

 

[nr758123]

Another Hull-Manchester service turned back at Stalybridge this afternoon. This is getting to be an almost daily occurence.

 

[pdq]

A bit chaotic at HUD...

• 1622 to Hull came in on P8 about 12 late.
• Announcement on board that Newcastle train coming in on P4 (which it did), and that driver is talking to the signaller (or might have been control)
• Announcement on board that train now going fast to Leeds so I get off, along with a number of other confused passengers
• Conductor at rear on phone to control, passing on passengers' displeasure, no doubt
• Train announced on platform as cancelled due to 'operational incident' but passengers largely stay on board
• Train shunts to end of platform
• Stopper comes and goes on P4 (which I'm on)
• Stopper waits at DEW while two others go past
• I miss my 1710 dentist appointment.

Any real reason why the Hull train was terminated at Hud, but only once it was ready to go? I assume the late running Middlesbrough must have coupled up to it as that is showing as leaving from P8 on RTT.

 

[nr758123]

According to passengers on board the 1547 Manchester to Hull (1622 from HUD), it forgot to stop at Mossley, sending some unwilling and angry Mossley residents on to Huddersfield.

Setting aside the circumstances of this particular incident, it's the culmination of weeks of appalling service. It was difficult for TPE to be worse than Northern were before the timetable change. Difficult, but clearly not impossible because that's what they have achieved.

 

[mike57]

Or find the money for a second platform and bridge at Malton. Don't forget an extra hourly service is in Northern's plan. Hopefully that will go from the bay platform 2 at York.

With sensible timetabling you don't need an extra platform for 1 train each way per hour, or even for 2 trains each way. A sensible timetable shouldn't be difficult. When the problems became apparent the whole change should have been put on hold until at least December, to give time to sort other issues such a driver training out.

 

[northernchris]

It was 9 late arriving at Manchester Airport today, with the delay again developing much in the way you describe. I am quite sure that a Monday-Friday running of this service has yet to arrive on time since the new timetable was introduced.

According to Recent Train Times, this service has a 0% PPM rate for the last 4 weeks, with an average delay of 25 minutes

 

[mike57]

10:35 arrival 10:46 departure from Scarborough canceled yet again. 24L turned at Malton. Once Liverpool reopens no doubt it will get even worse

Edit-13:08 dep at Malton showing 15 late so going to miss connection at Seamer AGAIN.
Edit 2 - A further cancellation this evening with the 19:35 arr 19:46 departure canceled

 

[scarby]

0835 arrival into Scarborough cancelled - what great work by TPE on the first day of the Yorkshire v Surrey cricket match and thousands of people arriving into the town.

 

[mike57]

Another appalling day for Scarborough passengers, so far 1 cancellation and everything late some by 20 to 30 mins. Nothing seems to be happening with regards to sorting this mess out and TPE seem totally disinterested.

 

[transmanche]

Another appalling day for Scarborough passengers, so far 1 cancellation and everything late some by 20 to 30 mins.

I thought there was a specific thread to discuss the blow-by-blow minutiae of services to/from Scarborough?

 

[northernchris]

I was in Manchester today and from what I saw very few TPE services were making it through to the Airport with a lot of the North services terminating at Piccadilly. It appears a signalling issues between Bolton and Preston was the cause, with a Oxford Road-Blackpool service being cancelled and blocking platform 5, meaning the Warrington service was in platform 3 and the next Blackpool terminator occupying platform 1. This led to trains queuing up to get through Deansgate/Oxford Road, although one service which got terminated at Piccadilly was only 8 minutes late on arrival. There appears to be too many trains heading through this corridor in that one or two trains arriving out of sequence throws the entire timetable out.

 

[rg177]

1015 Newcastle to Manchester Airport today.

0918 and 1002 had been cancelled, so we were quite busy. Smooth to Leeds where we caught up to the ex Hull and promptly lost 12 minutes as unless that service is exactly on time, my service suffers.

Glacial pace through Manchester, and predictably terminated 19L at Piccadilly. Stuffs up Piccadilly for 5 minutes while it detrains and waits to go, then everyone rams onto the 150 behind.

First use of the new Ordsall Chord services, and a predictably poor show.

 

[Kieran1990]

I’ve done 3 weeks of the new timetable now- luckily more annual leave this week. Kept my eye on RTT for the North Route over the last 2 days, it’s been awful by the looks of it!
Now how can it be improved/ tweaked to make it work??
Sadly I doubt TPE will revert to the old timetable or route everything back via guide bridge.
Starting to look like another operation princess to me.

 

[nw1]

The Piccadilly to Hull trains have gone from typically 1hr 54 with 6 intermediate stops to 1hr 58 with 10 intermediate stops (extra stops at Mossley, Slaithwaite, Batley and Garforth). So effectively Hull's semi-fast service from Manchester has been converted into a stopper to allow an extra fast service to Newcastle. Does the demand on the Newcastle route really justify this increase in frequency at Hull's expense, or would greater capacity on an hourly link be sufficient? And surely a fast train every 15 mins between Manchester and Leeds (with 1 or 2 stops) is frequent enough, as long as the trains are big enough to provide sufficient capacity? This could be achieved by diverting one of the fast Newcastle trains to Hull and cutting back the Manc - Hull to terminate at Leeds.

I wonder about that... I am not a regular user of this line (have used it very occasionally to travel Manchester-Leeds) but I'd have thought a fast service _of sufficient length_ (which was presumably the problem with the old service, they were too short) every 15 minutes from Manchester to Leeds would be sufficient, with then two trains going on to Newcastle and the other two somewhere else. I'd certainly class that as pretty much 'turn up and go'. What is the actual need to run all of 6 trains an hour TPE.. why not a regular 15 min interval MAN-Leeds with the old-style stopper slotted in between, i.e the old service pattern but with longer trains? That way long distance passengers get a limited stop and still very frequent service (double Southampton to London, for instance) while local stations get their own dedicated stopper.

 

[greyman42]

Another poor afternoon for TPE. Services not starting at the airport and terminating short at Northallerton and Durham.

 

[nr758123]

A lot of the time, the old Hull-Manchester service is now a Hull-Stalybridge service.

It's not uncommon for the eight miles between Manchester and Mossley to take 1½ hours, with a lengthy and unplanned change at Stalybridge.

Still, driving 30% of the passengers away by providing such a poor service has lessened the predicted overcrowding.

Somewhere in the franchise documentation there's reference to promoting modal shift being one of the objectives of the TPE franchise. But it seems only TPE interpreted that as getting people off the trains and into their cars, rather than the other way round.

Six weeks in, it's time to acknowledge what was apparent to a lot of people even before it started, that the new timetable doesn't work either for longer distance (Manchester-Scarborough/Hull/Middlesbrough) passengers, or for stations between Stalybridge and Huddersfield.

 

[lejog]

I wonder about that... I am not a regular user of this line (have used it very occasionally to travel Manchester-Leeds) but I'd have thought a fast service _of sufficient length_ (which was presumably the problem with the old service, they were too short) every 15 minutes from Manchester to Leeds would be sufficient, with then two trains going on to Newcastle and the other two somewhere else. I'd certainly class that as pretty much 'turn up and go'. What is the actual need to run all of 6 trains an hour TPE.. why not a regular 15 min interval MAN-Leeds with the old-style stopper slotted in between, i.e the old service pattern but with longer trains? That way long distance passengers get a limited stop and still very frequent service (double Southampton to London, for instance) while local stations get their own dedicated stopper.

There are now four fast trains timetabled to run Manchester to Leeds every 15mins - that's the problem. This was not the case before May when unevenly spaced services allowed stopper services time to operate inbetween. IIRC the old Huddersfield to Leeds stopper took 40mins and could not now fit in between fast journeys taking 19mins every 15mins.

 

[darloscott]

I've said it before but the major issue seems to be the lack of layover time between journeys meaning they're having to spin late runners short of the destination to get them back on time and back where they should be. This could be solved by adding an extra unit into the timetable at a few points but of course that's not a cheap (or easy) solution for TPE, although this will be costing them big time in delay compensation and ultimately lost revenue long term

 

[NorthernSpirit]

As I've suggested in the other TPE thread which was for everyone to email Robert Goodwill, the MP for Scarborough and Whitby and also Kevin Hollinrake, the MP for Thirsk and Malton and state what a disaster the TPE service to Scarborough is along with missed connections and the constant turnbacks at Malton. Mentioning that if nothing is done, you're going to take it to the media.

It may get a reaction and something may be done about it.

 

[43074]

It may get a reaction and something may be done about it.

But what can be done though?
- Extra trains are on their way fairly soon in the form of Mk5s and AT300s, and there are no other spare DMUs suitable for TPE at the moment
- Rewriting the timetable again would take time but is probably the only way to get the longer turnarounds they need for reliability, and such an exercise would probably exacerbate some of the issues by stretching crew and stock even further, neither of which are in plentiful supply, and finally;
- Reverting to the old timetable wouldn't solve anything as the scale of the changes on Northern (which will have been planned around the TPE changes and vice versa) and the knock on impacts on other TOCs mean this would almost certainly be impossible. Hence why such a proposal by Northern before the change was vetoed.

It's very easy to say there needs to be a solution, but it's always going to take time: the best option would have been to get it right in the first place! The example of the timetabling on the Scarborough branch shows they definitely got it wrong, no one is questioning that, but like Thameslink the issues are so fundamental there are no simple solutions.

 

[Bantamzen]

Taking nothing more than a cursory glance at the TPE timings through the core, it seems to me that the problems with the timetables are not just centred around the Manchester / Ordsall corridor. Many TPEs are losing time through the York-Leeds-Manchester section, and with such tight windows at Manchester its not surprising that even a few minutes lost causes so many problems further along the route. And this is nothing new BTW, on the previous Scarborough-Liverpool path that I used regularly between Leeds & Manchester it was not unusual for it to lose 5-10 through York, more through Leeds-Huddersfield & then lose its path across the throat at Mnachester Piccadilly. Even if it was on time, it was not unusual for it to catch up with a Northern Huddersfield-Manchester stopper running late, and lose similar time by the time it got to Ardwick.

Herein lies the problem, the North TP is too busy, & too capacity limited to act as an Intercity, Regional & Local line. There just aren't enough overtaking points, and those that exist are too short to really allow smooth running of all types of services. But being one of only three cross Pennine routes, all with the same problems, it has to serve as such. So what is needed is real investment, and that needs to start soon. The D(a)fT & Grayling have procrastinated about what to do for way too long, real solutions need to be mapped out & put into play post haste. Given the mounting problems with track capacity, demand, platform lengths its never going to be easy, and may well have to include both short & longer term plans to get it working. For me electrification of the North TP & Leeds-York, and dare I say it straight after if not alongside, the Calder need to be funded & planned to allow for better acceleration profiles for EMUs / Bi-Modes across the North TP to allow better chances of timetable recovery, with the (eventually) Calder available as a contingency. Then as this rolls out the digital signalling indicated as an option by the DfT can be rolled out to increase track capacity. Finally, and as a longer term plan a new route through the Pennines to eventually remove the InterCity element from the North TP completely.

In the meantime? Frankly I don't know what the answer is. Perhaps once additional DMU availability opens up with cascades from other TOCs, Northern could sub-contract the stoppers once again, splitting them at Huddersfield to reduce impact whilst TPE use some of the capacity released to strengthen existing services until the new stock comes online, with the rest used on supplementary services such as York-Scarborough as & when needed.

 

[FQTV]

I see other posters have been tracking services, and observing that the pinch points aren’t limited to (say) Manchester.

From doing the same thing, I’m seeing services arrive early into Newcastle, no conflicting movements and apparently no possibility that the outbound service is waiting for crew from another service.

And yet the outbound is leaving late and then, remarkably, losing time on clear runs to Durham and even to Darlington and York.

2 minutes late out of Newcastle seems to quickly become 19 at Piccadilly and it's turned there instead of running on.

The catastrophic effects manifest themselves in Manchester, but the butterfly wings seem to flap first far away, and I can’t yet work out why even when the Newcastle turnround is longer than timetabled, and the 185 has a clear run, services are seemingly handicapped in some way.

 

[nw1]

(edited to remove duplicate)

There are now four fast trains timetabled to run Manchester to Leeds every 15mins - that's the problem. This was not the case before May when unevenly spaced services allowed stopper services time to operate inbetween. IIRC the old Huddersfield to Leeds stopper took 40mins and could not now fit in between fast journeys taking 19mins every 15mins.

OK was unaware of that, ISTR it always being near-enough every 15 mins but evidently not.

On a related note, why not run Manchester Piccadilly to the airport as a dedicated high frequency shuttle every 10 mins using EMUs? That would seem to be a more efficient way of doing things and avoid conflicts in the Manchester area, not to mention avoiding delays on the airport service due to originating from somewhere miles and miles away. Dedicated airport services seem to be the standard pattern across Europe where the airport isn't on a main line already.

For example in Barcelona (at least in 2010) there was a half hourly EMU from the airport to the city centre calling at all local stations. A 10-minute all stations service from Piccadilly to the Airport would be an improvement on that!

 

[NorthernSpirit]

But what can be done though?
- Extra trains are on their way fairly soon in the form of Mk5s and AT300s, and there are no other spare DMUs suitable for TPE at the moment
- Rewriting the timetable again would take time but is probably the only way to get the longer turnarounds they need for reliability, and such an exercise would probably exacerbate some of the issues by stretching crew and stock even further, neither of which are in plentiful supply, and finally;
- Reverting to the old timetable wouldn't solve anything as the scale of the changes on Northern (which will have been planned around the TPE changes and vice versa) and the knock on impacts on other TOCs mean this would almost certainly be impossible. Hence why such a proposal by Northern before the change was vetoed.

It's very easy to say there needs to be a solution, but it's always going to take time: the best option would have been to get it right in the first place! The example of the timetabling on the Scarborough branch shows they definitely got it wrong, no one is questioning that, but like Thameslink the issues are so fundamental there are no simple solutions.

Well once the MP's get wind of what's been going on, the MP's can then lobby the Government to see what can be done to resolve the diabolical timetable. As mentioned by myself and others, the quick fix is a York to Scarborough shuttle using two units.

 

[43074]

Well once the MP's get wind of what's been going on, the MP's can then lobby the Government to see what can be done to resolve the diabolical timetable. As mentioned by myself and others, the quick fix is a York to Scarborough shuttle using two units.

If it's such a quick fix where will the 2 units come from to work this? Are these in addition to or instead of the Liverpool services? What about finding drivers and conductors?