I wonder if passengers are happier to pay off-peak walk up fares on the Birmingham corridor than on the more northern routes? Is Birmingham to London Any Permitted Off-Peak Return at £44.30 too unreasonable? Manchester to London is £70 so might be more likely to force people onto Advances from £11.50, as the savings are greater, even though there isn't that much difference in the SVR cost per mile.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
West Coast franchise timetable - what would you do?
- Thread starter 465fan
- Start date
- Status
I wonder if passengers are happier to pay off-peak walk up fares on the Birmingham corridor than on the more northern routes? Is Birmingham to London Any Permitted Off-Peak Return at £44.30 too unreasonable? Manchester to London is £70 so might be more likely to force people onto Advances from £11.50, as the savings are greater, even though there isn't that much difference in the SVR cost per mile.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
It is quite expensive though compared to the advance fare. As long as rock bottom advance fares are available people will opt for them over the more expensive walk-up fares. Virgin also promote their advance fares more.
That is certainly the case on most long distance routes nationwide, but I wonder if the availability of cheaper walk on trains (i.e. LM and CH) between Birmingham and London makes a difference? Perhaps cost conscious passengers in this market value flexibility over speed, given the relatively short distance, and would therefore generally go for LM/CH walk on fares instead of VT Advance fares?
DarloRich
Veteran Member
There is a market for MORE Virgin trains to stop at MKC. It is a growing town with a need for fast connections to London.
IMO it is more likely that towns to the north will loose thier Virgin services in favour of MKC. For instance Rugby and MK are quite close. I could see Rugby loosing all but one train an hour to Lonndon in favour of MK. Connections to MK are availble via Northampton on LM or north to Coventry
IMO it is more likely that towns to the north will loose thier Virgin services in favour of MKC. For instance Rugby and MK are quite close. I could see Rugby loosing all but one train an hour to Lonndon in favour of MK. Connections to MK are availble via Northampton on LM or north to Coventry
That will probably come with HS2. At the moment too many paths are taken up by trains whizzing through MKC at speed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Rugby only has one VT train per hour now.
Why not just stop everything at Milton Keynes? On the GWML FGW stop almost everything at Reading. At the start of the Greater Western franchise in 2006 the remaining services that didn't stop had a Reading call added except for one peak service that remains non-stop from Swindon to Paddington.
Failed Unit
Established Member
If I had the franchise and lots of extra pendos (no voyagers) I would run the following.
London - birmingham - Scotland merging 2 existing trains together and giving Wolves 2tph in the process.
London - Manchester - Scotland giving Bolton a direct train to London and replacing the TPE service path. Not many people stay on the train from Scotland to Manchester airport, I am in the minority. Scotland - Stockport & Stoke may be useful. Lancaster will still have direct trains to the airport.
I don't really see why the 20 minute frequency is important when Virgin wants everyone booking in advance.
I would do London - Shrewsbury if the wires existed replacing the London Midland service (not the all stations one).
London - birmingham - Scotland merging 2 existing trains together and giving Wolves 2tph in the process.
London - Manchester - Scotland giving Bolton a direct train to London and replacing the TPE service path. Not many people stay on the train from Scotland to Manchester airport, I am in the minority. Scotland - Stockport & Stoke may be useful. Lancaster will still have direct trains to the airport.
I don't really see why the 20 minute frequency is important when Virgin wants everyone booking in advance.
I would do London - Shrewsbury if the wires existed replacing the London Midland service (not the all stations one).
How are you going to get a Pendolino from Bolton to Preston?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It's a good for their marketing that they can say they run trains to Birmingham and Manchester every 20 mimutes.
Failed Unit
Established Member
Using the wires, once they are completed and a 57 up that point. As any new build of pendo will probably take as long as electrification won't be a problem.
Dreadnought
Member
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2007
- Messages
- 586
Rugby only has one train an hour now for most of the day. There are some exceptions to this but not many!
As for travelling via COV, that involves additional tickets as you would have to double back on yourself!
Had a laugh when I read this - just because NR are moving their HQ to MK does not make it a special place.
Then read the part about people from Rugby changing there for Virgin trains to London and decided that you are not having a laugh but taking the p*ss.
Current Virgin train Rugby-Euston 50 mins.
Current LM trains Rugby-MK take 45/50 mins then say another 45 mins to Euston (including change time).
Milton Keynes gets 3 Virgin and 4 LM trains an hour to London (off peak) which is sufficient for their needs.
Why should the intercity service for Milton Keynes be less than Reading? As I say almost everything stops at Reading and I'm sure a direct Scotland to Milton Keynes service would be useful not just for Scotland but would also give Carlisle and Preston a direct link to Milton Keynes.
Cherry_Picker
Established Member
Reading is a massive junction and a much busier interchange than Milton Keynes, surely?
Comparing the urban areas gives a somewhat bigger population for Reading. According to Wikipedia, the Reading/Wokingham urban area has about 370,000 people (2001 Census) with the Milton Keynes urban area being around 240,000 (2009 estimate).
Reading station is well located for pedestrian access to shopping and office destinations in the town centre whereas Milton Keynes station is located some distance from the main shopping area and the spread out nature of MK means that distances are generally a lot longer. This means that visitors to MK are more likely to need to be picked up or have to get a taxi to where they want to go. There is a bus station next to MKC station but services are considerably more limited than those from Reading town centre.
MK is famously car orientated meaning that the whole town is easy to access by car and thus people travelling from nearby areas are more likely to drive. Reading is a more difficult place to drive in with severe traffic problems, which encourages more rail use.
There are more rail connections at Reading in addition to the coach service to Heathrow.
But encouraging people to drive is not something that should be done. The days of the private car may be numbered and if this is the case then Milton Keynes will have to change.
Last edited:
It is starting to change but has a long way to go. Parking in Central MK used to be very easy and largely, if not totally, free but is now becoming more difficult and more expensive. Extensions to the town being built now are less car orientated. It has now even got some bus lanes, although they are blamed by some residents as causing MK's first regular traffic jams. MK could be in trouble if car use suddenly becomes prohibitively expensive.
Last edited:
Quite easily, I don't understand the question? You just stop a train in the platform and let a train overtake. Given that Rugby has loads of lines and loads of platforms I don't understand the problem?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
If FGW did that, they would be in breach of their franchise! So no, the DfT would not be happy and it would be goodbye FGW.
Was your post serious? It can't have been! A TOC can't just make a decision like that!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
But you can say that about loads of places, and it only works if they don't call at many stations!
So, you either have a stopper that links all the places up, or you have fast trains that call at one of these places, make it impossible to get between them, and also then you have to increase times to Liverpool/Manchester/Glasgow as a result.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I think you meant "set the terms of the franchise!"
If you had the franchise and did that, you'd be in breach of it!
MidnightFlyer
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 16 May 2010
- Messages
- 12,857
Why can't there be both, the fasts in moderation though. I can't see why the Manchester via Crewe services can't stop south of Crewe - AFAIK it's the slowest Manchester service anyway...
I think there is substantial padding in this service. I do Euston to Manchester once or twice a month and usually use the Crewe service back to London and it usually arrives several minutes early.
Indeed. RDG has 3 times the passenger usage figures of MKC!
I agree, but that's well beyond the scope of the DfT's remit to set the West Coast franchise timetable!
It may be slightly slower timetabled, but in reality it's often actually quicker (as radamfi says there's loads of padding). I guess you could argue that the padding could be used for an additional station stop somewhere, and I wouldn't disagree with that (in which case we will have about 10 different views on whether it should be WFJ, MKC, RUG, NUN and so on, I'm sure even Rugeley TV will get a vote too!
)
MidnightFlyer
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 16 May 2010
- Messages
- 12,857
It's the service I use whenever I go to London. There's a good five minutes in the Up direction at least, due in at xx04, I've been on the concourse at Euston before the hour before.
I have just checked the layout of Rugby and if a train stopped in platform 4 it would delay any train overtaking as they would have to slow down.
I was referring to the new franchise. As I said the RUS talks of a new hourly semi-fast service to Exeter and acceleration of Plymouth/Penzance services as a result of this. I can see people in Taunton will not be happy if all Plymouth/Penzance services call only at Reading and Exeter.
MidnightFlyer
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 16 May 2010
- Messages
- 12,857
p4 at Rugby is the UF AFAIK, so if the blokes at Rugby SCC knew there was an overtake that would be needed, why not put it in on p5/6 (the US and UPL?)?
The Planner
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 16,087
You would always use 5 or 6 to regulate a train, never 4.
Dreadnought
Member
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2007
- Messages
- 586
Most VT services to Euston stop in P5 (US) anyway which can then access back to the UF. P6 (Up Northampton I think is its correct designation) can only access the US and would then need to use Hillmorton crossovers to gain access to the UF.
Regarding the discussion on the lack of fast services from Nuneaton. All of this has concentrated on services to London, the northbound services leave a lot to be desired. :cry:
Anyone travelling to Liverpool, Manchester and all points North West has to endure an hourly 'stopper' to at least Stafford before any onward travel.
Thanks to the Cross Country sevices, a large percentage of passengers travelling from the East Midlands to the North West also use this service and to see the incredulous expressions on the faces when the list of calling points and more changes are announced often makes me smile!
Why the Eus-Liv calls at Stafford only and not Nuneaton is strange, the main connections from Stafford are all served by direct trains from London anyway. The only convenience is for passengers travelling to Stafford only, which must be a lot less than the potential passengers to and from the connections at Nuneaton.
I await the response from 'Disgusted from Stafford'!
Anyone travelling to Liverpool, Manchester and all points North West has to endure an hourly 'stopper' to at least Stafford before any onward travel.
Thanks to the Cross Country sevices, a large percentage of passengers travelling from the East Midlands to the North West also use this service and to see the incredulous expressions on the faces when the list of calling points and more changes are announced often makes me smile!
Why the Eus-Liv calls at Stafford only and not Nuneaton is strange, the main connections from Stafford are all served by direct trains from London anyway. The only convenience is for passengers travelling to Stafford only, which must be a lot less than the potential passengers to and from the connections at Nuneaton.
I await the response from 'Disgusted from Stafford'!
Statto
Established Member
My idea would be
xx00, Manchester stopping at Stoke, Stockport express
xx05, Wolverhampton stopping at Coventry,Birmingham International, |New Street, Sandwell & Dudley
xx10, Liverpool stopping at Stafford, Runcorn
xx20 Manchester stopping at stopping at, Stafford, Crewe, Wilmslow, Stockport
xx25 Birmingham New Street stopping at Watford, Rugby, Coventry, Birmingham International
xx30 Preston/Glasgow, stopping at Crewe, Warrington, Wigan, Preston, Lancaster, Penrith, Carlisle, Motherwell
xx40 Manchester stopping at Watford or Milton Keynes, Stoke, Macclesfield, Stockport
xx45 Birmingham stopping at Milton Keynes, Coventry, Birmingham International
xx50 Chester/North Wales stopping at Watford or Milton Keynes, Nuneaton, Stafford, Crewe, Chester then North Wales.
Wondering whether to extend the xx45 Birmingham to Manchester replacing one of the XC services stopping at Milton Keynes, Coventry, Birmingham International, Wolverhampton, Stafford, Stoke, Macclesfield, Stockport?
xx00, Manchester stopping at Stoke, Stockport express
xx05, Wolverhampton stopping at Coventry,Birmingham International, |New Street, Sandwell & Dudley
xx10, Liverpool stopping at Stafford, Runcorn
xx20 Manchester stopping at stopping at, Stafford, Crewe, Wilmslow, Stockport
xx25 Birmingham New Street stopping at Watford, Rugby, Coventry, Birmingham International
xx30 Preston/Glasgow, stopping at Crewe, Warrington, Wigan, Preston, Lancaster, Penrith, Carlisle, Motherwell
xx40 Manchester stopping at Watford or Milton Keynes, Stoke, Macclesfield, Stockport
xx45 Birmingham stopping at Milton Keynes, Coventry, Birmingham International
xx50 Chester/North Wales stopping at Watford or Milton Keynes, Nuneaton, Stafford, Crewe, Chester then North Wales.
Wondering whether to extend the xx45 Birmingham to Manchester replacing one of the XC services stopping at Milton Keynes, Coventry, Birmingham International, Wolverhampton, Stafford, Stoke, Macclesfield, Stockport?
Last edited:
xx.02 Glasgow calling at Preston, Lancaster, Carlisle, Motherwell, Glasgow. xx.05 Manchester calling at Stoke, Macclesfield, Stockport, Manchester. xx.08 Wolverhampton calling at Rugby, Coventry, International, New Street, Sandwell & Dudley, Wolverhampton. xx.11 Liverpool calling at Stafford, Runcorn, Liverpool. xx.14 Chester/North Wales calling at Milton Keynes, Crewe, Chester and principal stations. xx.25 Manchester calling at Rugby, Stoke, Stockport, Manchester. xx.28 Birmingham calling at Milton Keynes, Coventry, International and New Street. xx.42 Liverpool calling at Nuneaton, Runcorn, Liverpool. xx.45 Manchester calling at Milton Keynes, Lichfield, Tamworth, Crewe, Wilmslow, Stockport, Manchester. xx.48 Birmingham calling at Watford, Coventry, International and New Street. xx.51 Crewe (London Midland) calling at Watford, (crosses over to the slows just before Milton Keynes), Milton Keynes, Northampton, Rugby, and Trent Valley stations to Crewe. Do feel free to point out anything that I've missed. This is assuming the spare path gets used on a Liverpool service. EDIT: I forgot to say, that I would transfer the alternate hourly Oxenholme and Penrith stops to the Birmingham-Scotland services, with good connections into London services at Preston. 
Last edited:
- Status