Virgin Plans Extra Liverpool Lime Street Services from 10 June 2019

[pt_mad]

And as I said, as a whole package, once the overcrowding issue is sorted, the LNR service provides the best service (as an overall package of frequency, connectivity and price) those stations have ever had since the day they opened.

Plus the superior accessibility of the Desiros service with wide doors, hop on and off facilities for bicycles and pushchairs, vestibule standing areas etc. It's great at what it does.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Certainly the passenger information boards at Line Street will look a bit different from May with the additional trains plus Rugeley Trent Valley, Birmingham Internatonal and London Euston for LNWR, Chester and Wrexham General for TfW and Glasgow Central and Oxenholme for TPE.

I see there's a blank space on the TOC board at Lime St's information kiosk, ready for the TfW sign!
There's also a blank space where the cash machines should go.

 

[dk1]

I see there's a blank space on the TOC board at Lime St's information kiosk, ready for the TfW sign!
There's also a blank space where the cash machines should go.

A cash machine? How nice it is to see them incorporating some history into the station refurb

 

[nuneatonmark]

And as I said, as a whole package, once the overcrowding issue is sorted, the LNR service provides the best service (as an overall package of frequency, connectivity and price) those stations have ever had since the day they opened.

You could probably say that about most of the stations in the country. Most similar sized towns and cities similar distances from London have at least two trains per hour to London. Given the size of Nuneaton’s catchment area and growth in passengers it’s not unreasonable to expect 2 trains per hour all day.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You could probably say that about most of the stations in the country. Most similar sized towns and cities similar distances from London have at least two trains per hour to London. Given the size of Nuneaton’s catchment area and growth in passengers it’s not unreasonable to expect 2 trains per hour all day.

I think it's not unlikely we will see the LNR Trent Valley service increased to 2tph at some point, though not before the coming of the new rolling stock.

 

[30907]

You could probably say that about most of the stations in the country. Most similar sized towns and cities similar distances from London have at least two trains per hour to London. Given the size of Nuneaton’s catchment area and growth in passengers it’s not unreasonable to expect 2 trains per hour all day.

Nuneaton now suffers by being the largest town on the LNR route north of about MK - most other comparable towns are en route to somewhere bigger in traffic terms.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Nuneaton now suffers by being the largest town on the LNR route north of about MK - most other comparable towns are en route to somewhere bigger in traffic terms.

Nuneaton doesn't "suffer" anything other than overcrowding which will be resolved in May.

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...18/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=pax-calls&order=wtt

It has peak VTs and an hourly all day LNR service.

Personally I would like to see an hourly VT stop there (I'd suggest the Liverpool or Chester), but that has more to do with my favouring of a consistent all-day regular interval timetable than actual demand. If it's possible to stop a VT there once an hour during the peak when the WCML is even more crowded (but when VT are operating the same trains per hour as at other times) it should be possible to stop *all* of the instances of that service there, all day.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

Nuneaton doesn't "suffer" anything other than overcrowding which will be resolved in May.

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...18/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=pax-calls&order=wtt

It has peak VTs and an hourly all day LNR service.

Personally I would like to see an hourly VT stop there (I'd suggest the Liverpool or Chester), but that has more to do with my favouring of a consistent all-day regular interval timetable than actual demand. If it's possible to stop a VT there once an hour during the peak when the WCML is even more crowded (but when VT are operating the same trains per hour as at other times) it should be possible to stop *all* of the instances of that service there, all day.

Why slow down the one train an hour that runs from Liverpool to London to give a town that has it's own hourly service an optional faster service - what's wrong with stopping one of the three Manchester trains ?

 

[The Planner]

Personally I would like to see an hourly VT stop there (I'd suggest the Liverpool or Chester), but that has more to do with my favouring of a consistent all-day regular interval timetable than actual demand. If it's possible to stop a VT there once an hour during the peak when the WCML is even more crowded (but when VT are operating the same trains per hour as at other times) it should be possible to stop *all* of the instances of that service there, all day.

You would have to run the peak timetable all day to allow that and increase the journey times as that is how the Nuneaton stops are put in.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You would have to run the peak timetable all day to allow that and increase the journey times as that is how the Nuneaton stops are put in.

As you are aware I am in favour of an all day, start of service to end of service, consistent clockface pattern, so yes, I would support this.

 

[VT 390]

Personally I would like to see an hourly VT stop there (I'd suggest the Liverpool or Chester)

I think the Chester service should stop there as it is Liverpool's only service to London and should not be slowed down. I know it is Chester's only service as well but those trains tend to be quieter than the Liverpool's and I would imagine that more passengers use the services from Liverpool than Chester.

 

[driver_m]

As you are aware I am in favour of an all day, start of service to end of service, consistent clockface pattern, so yes, I would support this.

Not sure show you'd sell the ridding of the 2hr flat services from the North West for the sake of giving Nuneaton an extra stop .

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not sure show you'd sell the ridding of the 2hr flat services from the North West for the sake of giving Nuneaton an extra stop .

I don't think anyone really cares if it's 2h or 2h02 when it probably gets to Euston 5 minutes late anyway. It's not the era of crack expresses. It's the era of connectivity and regularity - it's the era of the regional express.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I think the Chester service should stop there as it is Liverpool's only service to London and should not be slowed down. I know it is Chester's only service as well but those trains tend to be quieter than the Liverpool's and I would imagine that more passengers use the services from Liverpool than Chester.

There will soon (probably) be more Liverpool services, as per VT's application.
The Chesters (single 221s mostly) are easily overrun, which is part of the reason why the Liverpools stop at Crewe off-peak to provide extra capacity to/from London.

 

[pt_mad]

Why slow down the one train an hour that runs from Liverpool to London to give a town that has it's own hourly service an optional faster service - what's wrong with stopping one of the three Manchester trains ?

Aye but couldn't you say that was already the case with Stafford?

 

[pt_mad]

Not sure show you'd sell the ridding of the 2hr flat services from the North West for the sake of giving Nuneaton an extra stop .

Part of it might be political. Headline one off flagship journey times and then the average off peak journey time. I know Stafford used to have big banners up saying 'xx minutes to London, hourly trains'.
Politically it might be seen as a backwards step with any franchise if the journey time actually increased. HS2 on the horizon means it's not indefinite as it used to be or seem. There are prospects of changes possible after HS2 takes all the ultra quick expresses away from the WCML. Probably a case of, the existing timetable works pretty flawlessly, why rock the boat when HS2 is due in 7 years and a whole new timetable overhaul may be required for that.

I don't think anyone really cares if it's 2h or 2h02 when it probably gets to Euston 5 minutes late anyway. It's not the era of crack expresses. It's the era of connectivity and regularity - it's the era of the regional express.

I do wonder whether it still kinda is the era for crack expresses to some extent though. Surely HS2 is aiming at those who desire that. And until that's built they can't take the skip stop journey time sensitive basis away from the WCML fast lines.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I do wonder whether it still kinda is the era for crack expresses to some extent though. Surely HS2 is aiming at those who desire that. And until that's built they can't take the skip stop journey time sensitive basis away from the WCML fast lines.

Unless those nasty Romance-style operators poke their noses in too much, I'd anticipate HS2 to not be about crack expresses either. I doubt for instance that there will be a non-stop Euston to Glasgow. Everything will stop at Old Oak, and I'd suggest everything should stop at Brum and Crewe too.

 

[dk1]

You would have to run the peak timetable all day to allow that and increase the journey times as that is how the Nuneaton stops are put in.

From the horses mouth. Been waiting for the knowledgeable reply.

 

[pt_mad]

I suppose the other question re Trent Valley off peak stops, and one which the TOCs will know with data: How many customers traveling between there and London purchase any operator tickets? And how many would if they were offered and the journey time was say 15/ 25 minutes better off peak?

If it was the case that 4 fifths of passengers purchased operator specific tickets, regardless of the fact there may be a fast alternative back later at the present (note: complete example to illustrate a point), then who's to say there will be any significant patronage on any new express stops?

It may be that passenger numbers are so good because the price is so good. Price may be king.

 

[AndrewE]

Personally I would like to see an hourly VT stop there (I'd suggest the Liverpool or Chester), but that has more to do with my favouring of a consistent all-day regular interval timetable than actual demand. If it's possible to stop a VT there once an hour during the peak when the WCML is even more crowded (but when VT are operating the same trains per hour as at other times) it should be possible to stop *all* of the instances of that service there, all day.

Why slow down the one train an hour that runs from Liverpool to London to give a town that has it's own hourly service an optional faster service - what's wrong with stopping one of the three Manchester trains ?

I think the Chester service should stop there as it is Liverpool's only service to London and should not be slowed down. I know it is Chester's only service as well but those trains tend to be quieter than the Liverpool's and I would imagine that more passengers use the services from Liverpool than Chester.

Look at it from the network perspective: which southbound train connects (safely) into the Birmingham-Norwich trains and picks up from most places on the WCML?
I am frustrated by the fact that it is often quicker to go from Crewe to Peterborough via Birmingham New St (well, it used to be) than it is to change at Nuneaton. It's only quicker via Nuneaton now if you take the stopper that goes via Alsager and Stoke: 1 hr 33 min to travel the first 70 miles!

 

[VT 390]

which southbound train connects (safely) into the Birmingham-Norwich trains

Which train runs from Birmingham to Norwich?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Look at it from the network perspective: which southbound train connects (safely) into the Birmingham-Norwich trains and picks up from most places on the WCML?
I am frustrated by the fact that it is often quicker to go from Crewe to Peterborough via Birmingham New St (well, it used to be) than it is to change at Nuneaton. It's only quicker via Nuneaton now if you take the stopper that goes via Alsager and Stoke: 1 hr 33 min to travel the first 70 miles!

That will be solved in May (though I know not if it connects properly or not).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which train runs from Birmingham to Norwich?

None these days, but the Stansted Turbostar goes from Nuneaton to Peterborough.

 

[AndrewE]

Which train runs from Birmingham to Norwich?

Can you not guess which trains I mean? You are right, nowadays they go to Stansted,

 

[pt_mad]

Look at it from the network perspective: which southbound train connects (safely) into the Birmingham-Norwich trains and picks up from most places on the WCML?
I am frustrated by the fact that it is often quicker to go from Crewe to Peterborough via Birmingham New St (well, it used to be) than it is to change at Nuneaton. It's only quicker via Nuneaton now if you take the stopper that goes via Alsager and Stoke: 1 hr 33 min to travel the first 70 miles!

Looks like from the May timetable the TrentValley service will depart Crewe around xx33 off peak. As opposed to xx02 today. The booked stop at Nuneaton looks to be xx35 or 36 ish. So just a tad over an hour. Looks like departures to Stansted off peak are booked to depart at xx52.

How would that compare to the current option via Birmingham?

Edit: Thinking about it, to get the same Stansted departure from New St at roughly twenty past the hour you'd have to be able to get from Crewe to New Street and change platforms as well within 50 minutes (if turned up to Crewe at roughly the same time). And that's only to equal the connection via Nuneaton. To beat it I dont think will be possible on the face of it but correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[AndrewE]

Looks like from the May timetable the TrentValley service will depart Crewe around xx33 off peak. As opposed to xx02 today. The booked stop at Nuneaton looks to be xx35 or 36 ish. So just a tad over an hour. Looks like departures to Stansted off peak are booked to depart at xx52.

How would that compare to the current option via Birmingham?

Edit: Thinking about it, to get the same Stansted departure from New St at roughly twenty past the hour you'd have to be able to get to New At from Crewe, and change platforms within 50 minutes to even make the same train.

You are right, it has got better in the last couple of years, and it's going to get better still soon. Why is it that these improvements only happen after your need to make the journeys dwindles? It's not long since it used to be about the same time, but a much more comfortable service, via London!

 

[dk1]

None these days, but the Stansted Turbostar goes from Nuneaton to Peterborough.

To be fair Ely. Twice the chance of a Norwich connection there.

 

[Deafdoggie]

I suppose the other question re Trent Valley off peak stops, and one which the TOCs will know with data: How many customers traveling between there and London purchase any operator tickets? And how many would if they were offered and the journey time was say 15/ 25 minutes better off peak?

If it was the case that 4 fifths of passengers purchased operator specific tickets, regardless of the fact there may be a fast alternative back later at the present (note: complete example to illustrate a point), then who's to say there will be any significant patronage on any new express stops?

It may be that passenger numbers are so good because the price is so good. Price may be king.

Indeed. How many people stand at Stoke, let the Virgin go, and get on LNR? Very many. Price is king, and the 350's are not bad trains at all. Of course, there are those who use Virgin, but for those who don't want to be tied to a fixed train, a LNR only ticket is excellent value, and their advances are even better value if you do want to be tied to a train. You can often get a First Advance cheaply. ideal if you like curtains-as there is little other difference in first class.

 

[VT 390]

Indeed. How many people stand at Stoke, let the Virgin go, and get on LNR? Very many. Price is king, and the 350's are not bad trains at all. Of course, there are those who use Virgin, but for those who don't want to be tied to a fixed train, a LNR only ticket is excellent value, and their advances are even better value if you do want to be tied to a train. You can often get a First Advance cheaply. ideal if you like curtains-as there is little other difference in first class.

What would really make the London Northwestern services better (and the reason why I won,t use them unless getting on at Crewe) is to introduce seat reservations on the grant valley services as I really like to have a window seat and unless you get on early in the trains journey then there is no guarantee that you will get a seat of your choice, I am not sure but I'm sure I have seen the slots for paper seat reservations on the 350/1 a 350/3.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What would really make the London Northwestern services better (and the reason why I won,t use them unless getting on at Crewe) is to introduce seat reservations on the grant valley services as I really like to have a window seat and unless you get on early in the trains journey then there is no guarantee that you will get a seat of your choice, I am not sure but I'm sure I have seen the slots for paper seat reservations on the 350/1 a 350/3.

Seat reservations were abolished on all LM routes (having been introduced near the start of that TOC's tenure; Silverlink never had them) because the turnarounds at Euston are not adequate to reliably place them and so with the large number of commuters etc they were causing arguments. If there is one thing that is worse than no seat reservations, it's ones you cannot rely on to be placed.

They therefore are very unlikely to make a return.