West Coast franchise timetable - what would you do?

[465fan]

Was looking at VT's franchise and services last night, and wondered if anyone would be interested in sharing their opinions on what they could do to improve

I looked at Manchester and Liverpool, and think there are some problems with the way it is. Last train Monday - Friday is shown as 2007 to Liverpool - frankly pathetic.

I had also looked at the calling points of the Manchesters - and in off peak, owing to the way the timetable is, you cannot do a direct run from Milton Keynes to Macclesfield; on account of they either stop at Maccs or Milton and never the two of them.

I had looked at this as an alternative (from Euston)
Red font shows current calling points
Green shows proposed calling points

xx00 Stoke on Trent, Macclesfield, Stockport, Manchester Piccadilly
xx03 Rugby, Coventry, International, New Street
xx07 Stafford, Runcorn, Lime Street
xx10 Milton Keynes, Crewe, Chester
xx20 Milton Keynes, Stoke on Trent, Stockport, Manchester Piccadilly
xx23 Watford, Coventry, International, New Street, Sandwell, Wolves
xx30 Warrington, Wigan, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme / Penrith, Carlisle, Glasgow
xx40 Crewe, Wilmslow, Stockport, Manchester Piccadilly
xx43 Milton Keynes, Coventry, International, New Street

xx00 Stoke on Trent, Stockport, Manchester (lower, fastest express)
xx03 Milton Keynes, Coventry, International, New Street
xx10 Rugby, Crewe, Runcorn, Lime Street
xx15 Milton Keynes, Crewe, Chester
xx20 Milton Keynes, Stoke, Macclesfield, Stockport, Manchester Piccadilly
xx23 Watford, Coventry, International, New Street, Sandwell, Wolves
xx30 Warrington, Wigan, Preston, Lancaster, Penrith, Carlisle, Motherwell, Glasgow (not Oxenholme; encourage TPE connections at Lancaster)
xx40 Stafford, Crewe, Wilmslow, Stockport, Manchester
xx43 Rugby, Coventry, International, New Street

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Mine:
xx00 - Crewe, Wilmslow, Stockport and Picc
xx03 - MKC, Coventry, Intl and New St
xx10 - Nuneaton, Runcorn and Lime St
xx15 - Watford Jn, Stafford, Crewe and Chester
xx20 - MKC, Stoke, Stockport and Picc
xx23 - Coventry, Intl, New St, Sandwell & Dudley and Wolves
xx30 - Crewe, Warrington BQ, Wigan NW, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme / Penrith (2:1), Carlisle, Lockerbie / Motherwell (alternating) and Glasgow Central
xx40 - MKC, Rugby, Stoke, Macclesfield, Stockport and Picc
xx43 - Watford Jn, Coventry, Intl and New St

EDIT - Crewe now on xx30 and not xx10
EDIT 2 - MKC now on xx40 in addition to others

 

[ukrob]

The Liverpool service is just fine and loads well without adding a stop and slowing it down thanks.

 

[Zoe]

This has been discussed a few times before and I think it's clear that Virgin and the dft are not interested in serving places like Nuneaton and Tamworth. The headline journey times are much more important to them.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I've made Coventry first stop on the Wolves-Euston trains as, at times, it is faster to get the Liverpool Liome St non-stop to Stafford and jump on an LM service to Wolves!

It is spinning plates getting this right, Watford and Rugby all warrant at least one Manchester / Liverpool / Chester train (i.e. long-distance) an hour, but you also have to maintain three to Keynes, and fast times to Liverpool and Manchester (hourly only). You also have to get even spacing for those stations with half-hourly services (like Crewe, and Watford / Rugby if need be).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

This has been discussed a few times before and I think it's clear that Virgin and the dft are not interested in serving places like Nuneaton and Tamworth. The headline journey times are much more important to them.

Similarly, I can't help but feel that the 0540 EDB-KGX and 1630 EUS-GLC services are pointless, they are just a marketing ploy, saying, 'Oh look, we can do X miles in X hours!'. The 1630 Euston-Glasgow is dead north of Preston, but a Lancaster and Carlisle stop would relieve later trains from Glasgow, and would actually give the train a point!

 

[radamfi]

I looked at Manchester and Liverpool, and think there are some problems with the way it is. Last train Monday - Friday is shown as 2007 to Liverpool - frankly pathetic.

There is also a 2107.

xx00 Stoke on Trent, Stockport, Manchester (lower, fastest express)

This train provides the Macclesfield connection from the XC train right in front of it which runs non-stop Stoke to Stockport.

xx20 Milton Keynes, Stoke, Macclesfield, Stockport, Manchester Piccadilly

Macclesfield passengers can easily change at Stoke to the XC train right behind it, so stopping additionally at Macclesfield is unnecessary.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

This has been discussed a few times before and I think it's clear that Virgin and the dft are not interested in serving places like Nuneaton and Tamworth. The headline journey times are much more important to them.

The LM service via the Trent Valley is well coordinated with the VT service at Rugby. This connection was created deliberately, European style, so passengers take advantage of it. So a direct service to Nuneaton, Tamworth and Lichfield is unnecessary.

 

[465fan]

With this, you create both a full journey opportunity, and make an even shorter journey time without the stopping at one station. Potentially, it comes right down to 2 hours on the nose.....

 

[Zoe]

So a direct service to Nuneaton, Tamworth and Lichfield is unnecessary.

I don't think the residents of those towns would agree with you. Nuneaton and Tamworth are not exactly small places as both have populations over 70000. It's all very well saying that an intercity service to London is not needed but you could use the same argument for Stafford.

 

[radamfi]

I don't think the residents of those towns would agree with you. Nuneaton and Tamworth are not exactly small places as both have populations over 70000. It's all very well saying that an intercity service to London is not needed but you could use the same argument for Stafford.

But the service is so seamless it is almost as if it was direct. That is the beauty of the interconnecting rail network enjoyed in many parts of mainland Europe. The Trent Valley passengers should be grateful that they can take advantage of the few implementations of that principle in the UK. The argument for direct services is only because of the deep rooted British obsession with avoiding changes.

The bad old way is still exhibited in the evening timetable when VT do stop in the Trent Valley and there are no longer convenient hourly connections at Rugby.

 

[Zoe]

If the London Midland Trent Valley service is late though I doubt the Virgin service would be held at Rugby. At the end of the day Virgin is a separate company so has no duty to wait for a London Midland service. If Silverlink had been merged into Virgin then maybe connections would be held but even then I doubt Virgin would be wanting to delay passengers already on the train from Birmingham.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Further, Nuneaton had an hourly non-stop service to Euston (with 390 operation) before December 2008, yet now has either a 350 calling at four stations, or a change!

 

[Zoe]

Further, Nuneaton had an hourly non-stop service to Euston (with 390 operation) before December 2008, yet now has either a 350 calling at four stations, or a change!

I just hope FGW (or the company that wins Greater Western) don't do the same with Taunton in 2016. The GW RUS talks of a new hourly semi-fast service from Paddington to Exeter and says this will allow Plymouth/Penzance trains to run faster between Paddington and Exeter. If these trains only call at Reading and Exeter then journey times to and from Taunton will be slower. It's a difficult decision though with towns with populations between 60000 and 80000, do you stop there to give the people of the town a service or are headline journey times to the major cities more important. In the case of the West Coast it seems to be the latter. Note that for the new franchise there is only a minimum service requirment and not a set timetable so the TOC could elect to stop at Nuneaton and Tamworth but I doubt they will.

 

[radamfi]

If the London Midland Trent Valley service is late though I doubt the Virgin service would be held at Rugby. At the end of the day Virgin is a separate company so has no duty to wait for a London Midland service. If Silverlink had been merged into Virgin then maybe connections would be held but even then I doubt Virgin would be wanting to delay passengers already on the train from Birmingham.

That is not an argument against the principle of providing good connections. It just reinforces the argument against TOC self interest. In most of Europe, great care would be made to ensure this important connection is maintained unless one of the trains is severely delayed.

 

[Zoe]

That is not an argument against the principle of providing good connections. It just reinforces the argument against TOC self interest. In most of Europe, great care would be made to ensure this important connection is maintained unless one of the trains is severely delayed.

How would you hold a train at Rugby though without delaying other Virgin services?

 

[radamfi]

Further, Nuneaton had an hourly non-stop service to Euston (with 390 operation) before December 2008, yet now has either a 350 calling at four stations, or a change!

What about Tamworth and Lichfield? The pre VHF service only catered for Nuneaton and service between towns in the Trent Valley was very infrequent.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Tamworth had about five calls in each direction off-peak, Lichfield about three. IIRC the peak services have got worse. I still think Tamworth and Nunny deserve a direct service though, and not one that calls at Watford, MKC, Northampton and Rugby!

 

[Zoe]

The question here is when does a town deserve a direct intercity service to London. Stafford is smaller than both Nuneaton and Tamworth and gets a direct intercity service. Why should Stafford get this when like Nuneaton and Tamworth it also has a London Midland service with a connection at Rugby.

 

[radamfi]

How would you hold a train at Rugby though without delaying other Virgin services?

Holding the train should only be necessary in a very minority of cases as great care should be made so that the LM service runs very punctually. There is a fair amount of padding in the LM timetable so the connection should be made most of the time anyway.

Anyone reading this thread with experience of Dutch or Swiss networks will think arguments against providing connections are very odd! I strongly recommend people to travel around these areas and see how connections are made, or at least just study timetables on the net. Before I did this I didn't appreciate this was possible and just accepted the typical British attitude that providing good connections is too difficult.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The question here is when does a town deserve a direct intercity service to London. Stafford is smaller than both Nuneaton and Tamworth and gets a direct intercity service. Why should Stafford get this when like Nuneaton and Tamworth it also has a London Midland service with a connection at Rugby.

Obviously the further you get from Rugby the greater the penalty for sitting on a stopping train. Stafford, like Nuneaton, Tamworth and Lichfield, is another relatively small place compared to most stops on VT, however it is a strategically important location. Crewe is another similar small place with even better connection possibilities.

 

[Zoe]

however it is a strategically important location. Crewe is another similar small place with even better connection possibilities.

I'm not sure it is as important these days as it once was. There really isn't any need for people to change at Stafford when good connections are available at Crewe. Again how large should a town have to be before it gets a direct intercity service to London? Nuneaton and Tamworth as I say both have populations over 70000 and or on the scale of Taunton. I doubt people would be very happy if FGW decided they were not going to stop any intercity trains at Taunton.

 

[465fan]

Tamworth has big connections, similar to Nuneaton. Tamworth and Nuneaton, at the least, deserve the Virgin WC service

 

[radamfi]

I'm not sure it is as important these days as it once was. There really isn't any need for people to change at Stafford when good connections are available at Crewe. Again how large should a town have to be before it gets a direct intercity service to London? Nuneaton and Tamworth as I say both have populations over 70000 and or on the scale of Taunton. I doubt people would be very happy if FGW decided they were not going to stop any intercity trains at Taunton.

I admit Stafford is a bit borderline but if VT didn't stop at Stafford then trains from Stafford to London would be substantially slower than before as they would be stopping at all TV stops then Rugby then Euston.

The current journey time from Nuneaton to Euston is not much different to the pre-VHF journey time as you only stop at Rugby then it is non-stop to Euston, and it is now hourly compared to a few times a day in the past.

I don't believe there should be a set population figure for a town to have a direct service to London. It is a moot question anyway as the total journey time is what matters, regardless of whether you have to change. So by my definition, Nuneaton has an hourly fast journey to London.

If Nuneaton got a regular 'direct' VT service to Euston, there would only be a marginal improvement in journey time from Nuneaton to Euston and an increase in journey time for whichever VT service you decide should stop there.

 

[Zoe]

It is a moot question anyway as the total journey time is what matters, regardless of whether you have to change.

I'm not sure that is the case. By that logic then you could cut Warrington and Wigan and run a local service between Preston and Crewe. This would result in even faster journey times to Glasgow. People do like direct trains.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I admit Stafford is a bit borderline but if VT didn't stop at Stafford then trains from Stafford to London would be substantially slower than before as they would be stopping at all TV stops then Rugby then Euston.

The current journey time from Nuneaton to Euston is not much different to the pre-VHF journey time as you only stop at Rugby then it is non-stop to Euston, and it is now hourly compared to a few times a day in the past.

I don't believe there should be a set population figure for a town to have a direct service to London. It is a moot question anyway as the total journey time is what matters, regardless of whether you have to change. So by my definition, Nuneaton has an hourly fast journey to London.

If Nuneaton got a regular 'direct' VT service to Euston, there would only be a marginal improvement in journey time from Nuneaton to Euston and an increase in journey time for whichever VT service you decide should stop there.

What? the new LM service calls at Rugby, Northampton, MKC and Watford Jn. The old pre-Dec 2008 timetable was HOURLY non-stop to London, and was significantly faster than it is now, even with the good connection at Rugby. Further, Nuneaton is a connection for Coleshill, Narborough and Hinckley, as well as 75,000 people in the town itself. Stafford is a change for Stone and Penkridge only., and about 60,000 people!

 

[radamfi]

What? the new LM service calls at Rugby, Northampton, MKC and Watford Jn

The off-peak service pattern from Nuneaton to Euston:

Nuneaton departure xx02 (LM)
Rugby arrive xx18 (LM)
Rugby departure xx24 (VT)
Euston arrival xx14 (VT)

Total journey time 1 hour 12 minutes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The old pre-Dec 2008 timetable was HOURLY non-stop to London

Sorry, I was thinking of Tamworth and Lichfield when I said 'a few times a day'.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

The off-peak service pattern from Nuneaton to Euston:

Nuneaton departure xx02 (LM)
Rugby arrive xx18 (LM)
Rugby departure xx24 (VT)
Euston arrival xx14 (VT)

Total journey time 1 hour 12 minutes.

You said 'only stop at Rugby', which implies a direct train, 'connection' is the term that should have been used.

Still, with the WCML improvements, Euston-Nuneaton could be done in near enough an hour, an hour two mins maximum.

 

[radamfi]

You said 'only stop at Rugby', which implies a direct train, 'connection' is the term that should have been used.

As I said, I only care about the total journey time!

Are people are taking advantage of the connection at Rugby or sitting on the LM train through Northampton? It would be particularly interesting to know whether people with tickets valid on VT stay on the train at Rugby even though they see the VT train pull up alongside.

Is the connection at Rugby regularly announced on the LM train? I've been on the Crewe-Euston LM train about 5 times and I think I've only heard it mentioned once.

It would be interesting to know if passenger numbers travelling from Tamworth and Lichfield to Euston have increased since the VHF changes. There might even be some passengers at Nuneaton attracted by the cheaper LM fares. The LM/VT choice on this route is similar to the German system of getting a cheaper fare by avoiding express trains.

 

[Invincibles]

I think that the VHF is about right and would not look to install more stops into trains.

However, there is a compelling case being made for Nuneaton over Stafford so maybe that could be done as a swap. It would remove other connections though so it is a hard decision.

Otherwise there has been nothing suggested so far that I would say was a good idea. I think that getting the fast headline times between major UK cities is very important in the battle against air and now that I know how well XC connections work at Stoke I am even more impressed by the timetable.

 

[Dreadnought]

Mine:
xx00 - Crewe, Wilmslow, Stockport and Picc
xx03 - MKC, Coventry, Intl and New St
xx10 - Nuneaton, Runcorn and Lime St
xx15 - Watford Jn, Stafford, Crewe and Chester
xx20 - MKC, Stoke, Stockport and Picc
xx23 - Coventry, Intl, New St, Sandwell & Dudley and Wolves
xx30 - Crewe, Warrington BQ, Wigan NW, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme / Penrith (2:1), Carlisle, Lockerbie / Motherwell (alternating) and Glasgow Central
xx40 - MKC, Rugby, Stoke, Macclesfield, Stockport and Picc
xx43 - Watford Jn, Coventry, Intl and New St

EDIT - Crewe now on xx30 and not xx10
EDIT 2 - MKC now on xx40 in addition to others

So why does Rugby only get a Manchester stopper that is via Stoke? If it was the Manc service that went via Crewe there could be some benefit with better connections to Anglo Scots services there.

Also, bring back our Brum service, IMO the pendo service is preferable to an all shacks 350!!

 

[87015]

Also, bring back our Brum service, IMO the pendo service is preferable to an all shacks 350!!

But it shouldn't be an all shacks 350. If it wasn't for VHF the Coventry corridor could have a sensible and usable lcoal service like it used to rather than the skip-stop nonsense it has because of the need to shoehorn in three Eustons an hour carrying a load of fresh air off peak.

 

[Zoe]

three Eustons an hour carrying a load of fresh air off peak.

The trains run at turn up and go frequencies but the fact is the walk-up fares are expensive so people book in advance and are restricted to one train.