• 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 Midlands Franchise ITT released by DfT

Status
Not open for further replies.

Harbornite

Established Member
Joined
7 May 2016
Messages
3,634
0822 ex Wolves to New Street on a Sunday morning is one that appears to be diagrammed for a 170. Perhaps for traction retention purposes? As said previously, the 95% rule appears to be unnecessary assuming WM gets the ex-Northern 323s.

It seems odd that it would be run for traction retention because 170s are frequently used that way on Shrewsbury services. As long as Wolves- Shrews remains as it is, then 170s will be needed, not to mention the 158s that serve the North Welsh and Cambrian Coasts.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Joined
21 May 2014
Messages
723
I was quite pleased with it until seeing the briefing document and consultation response, specifically page 78 and it stating Wolverhampton will be transferred from VTWC to the winner of the Franchise competition.

Surely a grave indication of Wolves losing ICWC services in the coming franchise contest...

More worryingly, aren't Virgin putting up a chunk of the cash for the station redevelopment/"Wolverhampton Interchange Project"? What happens there? Are their successor required to stump up the readies instead? Might Virgin withdraw their support for the project now?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It seems odd that it would be run for traction retention because 170s are frequently used that way on Shrewsbury services. As long as Wolves- Shrews remains as it is, then 170s will be needed, not to mention the 158s that serve the North Welsh and Cambrian Coasts.

I thought it was only 350s or 323s on Wolves>Brum stoppers now? Does that 170 really still run?
 

BHXDMT

Member
Joined
18 Feb 2011
Messages
276
Location
England
I thought it was only 350s or 323s on Wolves>Brum stoppers now? Does that 170 really still run?

Yes, it forms one of the later Walsall services (1017 I think) so it's really just a positioning move that operates in passenger service. I don't know whether that one will cease when electrics run to Rugeley as I'm not sure they'll keep 170s on Sunday Walsall/Rugeley after electrification and the Northern 323s potentially arriving.

Similarly on a weekday there's a 4 car 170 service Birmingham to Wolverhampton, which then shunts into 6 to operate a Shrewsbury service. Again, the units are required at Wolverhampton for the Shrewsbury which starts there, they just run in from Birmingham as a passenger working.
 
Last edited:

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Interestingly has anyone seen anything in the ITT to back up this story? Can't be good for commuters if its true.

DfT said:
However, we recognise that there are a number of other aspirations both locally and
nationally for enhanced services along this line, for example improved links between
Birmingham and Manchester or Shrewsbury and London. Therefore we will be ensuring
that the new operator of the West Midlands Franchise works alongside the Department,
West Midlands Rail, Network Rail and other train companies to ensure the best use of
capacity along this line in the longer term to benefit passengers and Stakeholders
across the country.

This could result in future changes to the routes or stopping patterns of West Midlands’
and other franchise operators’ services to maximise capacity and/or provide new
services along this important corridor. Any further changes to services operating along
the route will be determined by working closely with Stakeholders and customers to
make sure that they meet the needs and aspirations of the many people and
businesses that rely on them.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...iefing-document-and-consultation-response.pdf

Doesn't specifically say cutbacks will happen but with the Virgin VHF timetable having a negative effect on Northern and LM services I imagine some are fearing a repeat.
 

A0wen

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,450
It also reads to me that south WCML fasts that call at Leighton must also call at Bletchley (at present most do not). If that's true, that is a very welcome enhancement for us Bletchleyites.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I doubt it - it's just that with 1tph in each direction they aren't even nearly the main operator.

Eh? Looking at the timetable, there are only 2 LM services an hour from MKC which DON'T stop at Bletchley

1- the Crewe services, which run fast from MKC to Euston
2- the 07 past the hour from Birmingham, which again runs fast to Watford.

The second of those was introduced to ensure Northampton had a sensible journey time to London and was to compensate for the loss of the Crewe services.

I don't see any services Leighton Buzzard gets which Bletchley doesn't.

And neither of those above should stop at Bletchey - doing so would slow them down to the detriment of people travelling from much further out.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I'm very pleased that the DfT has finally decided to end the Trent Valley detour via Stoke-on-Trent. Non-stop running from Stafford to Crewe will greatly benefit Trent Valley passengers needing to travel to destinations north of Crewe.

Swings and roundabouts - they are losing an easy connection into Manchester though which can currently be achieved by changing at Stoke. Not all people are travelling north of Crewe and not all XC services stop at Stafford en route to Manchester.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,539
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Eh? Looking at the timetable, there are only 2 LM services an hour from MKC which DON'T stop at Bletchley

Look at the morning and evening peak, where there are quite a number of services going MKC-LBZ-EUS or vice versa, it is these that are proposed would stop at Bletchley.

One of them, the 1816 from Euston, carries a large Bletchley load (at least 50) changing at LBZ onto the Southern service (or at the moment the 1806ish stopper off Euston behind it).
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
Look at the morning and evening peak, where there are quite a number of services going MKC-LBZ-EUS or vice versa, it is these that are proposed would stop at Bletchley.

One of them, the 1816 from Euston, carries a large Bletchley load (at least 50) changing at LBZ onto the Southern service (or at the moment the 1806ish stopper off Euston behind it).

The limited peak Bletchley calls are a hangover from before the resignalling/remodelling, when the number of permitted 12-car calls per day was specifically restricted due to Platforms 3/4 being too short - the new TSR is presumably intended to fix this anomaly by "forcing" the new operator to change the historic practice and add the required extra calls.
 

A0wen

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,450
Look at the morning and evening peak, where there are quite a number of services going MKC-LBZ-EUS or vice versa, it is these that are proposed would stop at Bletchley.

One of them, the 1816 from Euston, carries a large Bletchley load (at least 50) changing at LBZ onto the Southern service (or at the moment the 1806ish stopper off Euston behind it).

Using the evening peak (4pm-7pm from Euston) as the example - "quite a number" that stop at Leighton Buzzard and not Bletchley actually means

17.16 ex Euston
17.49 ex Euston
18.21 ex Euston

So 3 trains.

Whereas the following skip Leighton Buzzard but stop at Bletchley having stopped at one or other of the intermediate stations

17.05 ex Euston (stops at Cheddington and omits Leighton Buzzard)
17.30 ex Euston (as above)
17.51 ex Euston (stops at Berkhamstead and omits Leighton Buzzard)
18.30 ex Euston (stops at Cheddington, omits Leighton Buzzard)

Assuming the AM peak is similar, Bletchley does far better out of the deal than Leighton Buzzard does, despite Bletchley's population of 33,000 and Leighton Buzzard's population of 37,000.

And yes, I know Bletchley also serves some of southern MK, but Leighton Buzzard also serves a number of other places as well.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,539
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Using the evening peak (4pm-7pm from Euston) as the example - "quite a number" that stop at Leighton Buzzard and not Bletchley actually means

17.16 ex Euston
17.49 ex Euston
18.21 ex Euston

1913 ex Euston too, which I class as peak even if it may technically not be. It's certainly a "mop up the last few commuters" train.

So 3 trains.

17.05 ex Euston (stops at Cheddington and omits Leighton Buzzard)
17.30 ex Euston (as above)
17.51 ex Euston (stops at Berkhamstead and omits Leighton Buzzard)
18.30 ex Euston (stops at Cheddington, omits Leighton Buzzard)

All quite slow trains.

Assuming the AM peak is similar, Bletchley does far better out of the deal than Leighton Buzzard does, despite Bletchley's population of 33,000 and Leighton Buzzard's population of 37,000.

Bletchley is also a junction, and its relatively infrequent peak service (including between there and MKC) limits its usefulness for that purpose. But remember it isn't just Bletchleyites who use the station, it is also chosen by people from fairly large swathes of south and west MK, so the catchment is probably quite a bit larger.

It also has a large and often 2/3 full car park, which means a better service might attract people to migrate from MKC to Bletchley instead, thus reducing pressure on MKC.
 
Last edited:

Harbornite

Established Member
Joined
7 May 2016
Messages
3,634
I thought it was only 350s or 323s on Wolves>Brum stoppers now? Does that 170 really still run?

I haven't seen or heard of any 170s on Wolves- Brums services, my point was that diesels are common on this route and will be for the time being because all LM services to Shrewsbury are 170s. This also means there isn't a need for one wolves- brum service to be a 170 for traction retention.
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,574
Location
Glasgow
Like I've already said the next LM franchise has to come up with a plan to reduce fare dodging. If they choose to go to DCO (which no-one has said is actually required by the ITT) then they will have to provide staff who focus on revenue duties. It will be harder to fare dodge in the future not easier.

I'm not surprised, what exactly is LM's approach at the moment to ticketing on the Cross City in particular? Gates open off-peak at University/New Street (Virgin), very few RPIs off-peak, effectively non-commercial guards within the Centro area. Tickets regularly going unchecked on other services too. Just a few warning signs about PFs. Seems in complete contrast to Northern who seem to have launched an all out attack on fare dodgers recently.
 
Last edited:

Class 170101

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
7,908
Just a few warning signs about PFs. Seems in complete contrast to Northern who seem to have launched an all out attack on fare dodgers recently.

Probably the subsidy / premium bottom line depends upon this being so at Northern.
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,574
Location
Glasgow
Probably the subsidy / premium bottom line depends upon this being so at Northern.

Indeed, but even old Northern had a very visible strategy as with Scotrail or any of the other TOCs operating lines like the Cross City. The Cross City needs the no nonsense Merseyrail treatment to combat the problems reported by the DfT. LM seem to do (very) sporadic peak blockades, but very little else.
 

Harbornite

Established Member
Joined
7 May 2016
Messages
3,634
Indeed, but even old Northern had a very visible strategy as with Scotrail or any of the other TOCs operating lines like the Cross City. The Cross City needs the no nonsense Merseyrail treatment to combat the problems reported by the DfT. LM seem to do (very) sporadic peak blockades, but very little else.

The cross city is pretty poor. I've been using it for at least two years on a fairly regular basis and have only encountered two guards checking tickets, one of which was two days ago. In fairness, the barriers at New Street are shut more often than not but this isn't always the case at University, and you've got stations like Barnt Green, Longbridge and Kings Norton that are sans barriers.
 

evergreenadam

Member
Joined
23 Nov 2013
Messages
266
1913 ex Euston too, which I class as peak even if it may technically not be. It's certainly a "mop up the last few commuters" train.

So 3 trains.



All quite slow trains.



Bletchley is also a junction, and its relatively infrequent peak service (including between there and MKC) limits its usefulness for that purpose. But remember it isn't just Bletchleyites who use the station, it is also chosen by people from fairly large swathes of south and west MK, so the catchment is probably quite a bit larger.

It also has a large and often 2/3 full car park, which means a better service might attract people to migrate from MKC to Bletchley instead, thus reducing pressure on MKC.

More Bletchley calls makes a lot of sense from a regional planning perspective, especially if the car park is currently under used. The population of the potential catchment area is vast and housing is reasonably priced for London commuters, so could encourage a lot of new business for the railway.
 

TH172341

Member
Joined
22 Aug 2010
Messages
392
The cross city is pretty poor. I've been using it for at least two years on a fairly regular basis and have only encountered two guards checking tickets, one of which was two days ago. In fairness, the barriers at New Street are shut more often than not but this isn't always the case at University, and you've got stations like Barnt Green, Longbridge and Kings Norton that are sans barriers.

The Snow Hill line isn't much better either. Barriers at Moor Street and Snow Hill are usually closed in peaks and during the day, but evenings they're open. And of course none of the other stations have barriers, and ticket checks are poor at the moment.

It's got worse I've found since around 2012 - I don't know why as the 172s are far easier than the 150s were to operate the doors - i.e no need to return to the rear cab. People can usually hitch a free ride from say Acocks Green through to Solihull as there's rarely a check. I dread to think the amount of lost revenue. The guards are pleasant and helpful though I must point out usually, and certainly I would never want any sort of driver only operation.

Northern/GWR I've found are the best for ticket checks, as well as XC. There does need to be a step up in revenue protection - barrier fitting, more rev protection patrols or encouraging guards to do so.
 
Last edited:

A0wen

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,450
1913 ex Euston too, which I class as peak even if it may technically not be. It's certainly a "mop up the last few commuters" train.

So 3 trains.



All quite slow trains.



Bletchley is also a junction, and its relatively infrequent peak service (including between there and MKC) limits its usefulness for that purpose. But remember it isn't just Bletchleyites who use the station, it is also chosen by people from fairly large swathes of south and west MK, so the catchment is probably quite a bit larger.

It also has a large and often 2/3 full car park, which means a better service might attract people to migrate from MKC to Bletchley instead, thus reducing pressure on MKC.

Adding the Bletchley stop to those services will be detrimental to people travelling to Northampton, Rugby and beyond, because it will extend their journey time and increase overcrowding on those services. People from those stations are already paying much more than Bletchley commuters and get a lousy service with relatively slow journey times, they shouldn't have to lose out again.
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,162
Swings and roundabouts - they are losing an easy connection into Manchester though which can currently be achieved by changing at Stoke. Not all people are travelling north of Crewe and not all XC services stop at Stafford en route to Manchester.

Not sure I buy that argument when there are two fast trains per hour Crewe-Manchester (one Virgin, one ATW) as well as two stopping trains, one of which goes via Manchester Airport as an additional connection opportunity. That's in addition to any connections at Stafford.
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,556
The limited peak Bletchley calls are a hangover from before the resignalling/remodelling, when the number of permitted 12-car calls per day was specifically restricted due to Platforms 3/4 being too short - the new TSR is presumably intended to fix this anomaly by "forcing" the new operator to change the historic practice and add the required extra calls.
If the resignations allowed extra calls, why didn't London Midland make use of them already? Surely it would cost more money to make additional stops?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
 

trash80

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2015
Messages
1,204
Location
Birches Green
The Snow Hill line isn't much better either. Barriers at Moor Street and Snow Hill are usually closed in peaks and during the day, but evenings they're open. And of course none of the other stations have barriers, and ticket checks are poor at the moment.

The Stratford service does always have a ticket check but it needs to i guess as the guard needs to find out who wants one of the request stops!
 

Class 170101

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
7,908
Extra Bletchley calls will probably be needed once East West Rail opens to provide connections and journey opportunities there.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
If the resignations allowed extra calls, why didn't London Midland make use of them already? Surely it would cost more money to make additional stops?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

I would guess there's not much incentive for LM to have done it on a commercial basis. Extra Bletchley calls wouldn't suddenly generate lots of new revenue - if anything it would slow down their fastest peak Milton Keynes-Euston timing, giving Virgin a slightly greater slice of the ORCATS revenue pie.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,539
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
More Bletchley calls makes a lot of sense from a regional planning perspective, especially if the car park is currently under used. The population of the potential catchment area is vast and housing is reasonably priced for London commuters, so could encourage a lot of new business for the railway.

The car park is so underused that they actually took a bit of it off and moved it to Leighton Buzzard instead (it's a modular twin-deck design).

The car park was never full even when it didn't have a second deck.

Meanwhile, more estates are being tacked onto MK increasing its catchment further.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I would guess there's not much incentive for LM to have done it on a commercial basis. Extra Bletchley calls wouldn't suddenly generate lots of new revenue - if anything it would slow down their fastest peak Milton Keynes-Euston timing, giving Virgin a slightly greater slice of the ORCATS revenue pie.

True. It could, FWIW, have been done as soon as everything was 350, as they have UDS, though I suspect they may have been keeping their options open to use 321s which didn't.

In any case the short platform issue was southbound (or terminating services) only.
 
Last edited:

miami

Established Member
Joined
3 Oct 2015
Messages
3,164
Location
UK
I'm very pleased that the DfT has finally decided to end the Trent Valley detour via Stoke-on-Trent. Non-stop running from Stafford to Crewe will greatly benefit Trent Valley passengers needing to travel to destinations north of Crewe.

Currently the xx02 departure from Crewe leaves Stafford at xx55. The xx19 to Birmingham departs Stafford at xx40, allowing later connections southbound. A direct service could leave at xx35 rather than xx02 - shaving half an hour off the trip.

The LM service at the moment from Stafford through to London is only slightly slower than the Virgin service (1h55 vs 1h20), and LM is the right choice if you arrive at the station at certain points (it isn't overtaken by another train). Direct from Crewe will make the timings 2h15 vs 1h40.

I continue to believe that the 350s are perfectly suitable rolling stock for the Trent Valley services. Are Pendolinos really suited to journeys where the majority of passengers are travelling relatively short distances to, for example, Milton Keynes? Replacing the 3+2 seating on the 350/2s with 2+2 seating and replacing the 2+2 first class seating on the 350/1s, 350/2s and 350/3s with 2+1 seating would ensure a pleasant ambience for passengers travelling somewhat longer distances, such as London to Lichfield, without restricting the amount of standing space available.

I'm perfectly happy with my table seat on the 350/3 I'm on at the moment, it has power (to charge my laptops, phone, tablet, and apparently headphones in the future), big window, not overcrowded like the "off peak" virgin train I could have got.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,539
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
FWIW if LM reseated the 350s to 2+1 seating in First I would give serious consideration to switching for a good many journeys, particularly long-distance ones.
 

miami

Established Member
Joined
3 Oct 2015
Messages
3,164
Location
UK
Does this new franchise have anything to say about ticket checks? On the 4 car train I took from Crewe today there wasn't a single ticket check for the nearly 3 hour trip.
 

ChrisHogan

Member
Joined
15 Jan 2016
Messages
342
Does this new franchise have anything to say about ticket checks? On the 4 car train I took from Crewe today there wasn't a single ticket check for the nearly 3 hour trip.

Yes lots. A report from Halcrow showing the very high level of passengers travelling without valid tickets is bundled with the other documents. Bidders are required to come up with a strategy to reduce ticketless travel (page 30 of the briefing document).
 

iainbhx

Member
Joined
8 Jul 2014
Messages
211
The Stratford service does always have a ticket check but it needs to i guess as the guard needs to find out who wants one of the request stops!

Rarely seen in the evenings in the inner stations on the Stratfords, I can't remember the last time I was checked on the evening services.

Morning has also dropped off considerably and the Moor Street barriers are wide open until 7am.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,539
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Does this new franchise have anything to say about ticket checks? On the 4 car train I took from Crewe today there wasn't a single ticket check for the nearly 3 hour trip.

I haven't seen a LM guard do tickets other than on the Marston Vale for well over a year, and there seems to be nobody about charging anybody any PFs except Euston barrier. As the barriers tend to be left open most of the time after about 1900 (and are rarely closed at Bletchley) they must be losing a fortune. Locally, MKC-BLY in the evening seems to be known in a number of circles as "the free train" - this is silly.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top