What is the best way to serve Barrow and Windermere?

[Bletchleyite]

One might well ask the question in reverse....why does every service start from Manchester? Windermere is a major tourist destination of note that many Manchester area people have visited for years. It was even better in the days when TPE ran there with the class 185 units as first-class accommodation was available to be booked with seat reservations that my wife and I always used when travelling from Manchester Airport station. The line northwards from Lancaster on the Barrow-in-Furness line calls at interesting places such as Grange-over-Sands and Ulverston.

The 185s caused serious overcrowding issues, 2 and a bit coaches of low density Standard were not anywhere near enough on pretty much any service, while even the 3-car all-Standard 195s are filling well. First Class had to some extent become the South East approach, i.e. it was paying for a seat rather than for extra luxury, which i find unacceptable outside of places with major infrastructure constraints. However double 185s would work (subject to SDO/some platform extensions), while TPE operating it using 802s would provide good capacity, the prestige of an InterCity service and First Class which I agree would sell reasonably well to day trippers at the right price.

If we assume Windermere wiring isn't happening any time soon, I think I would favour two-hourly clockface to each, with a shuttle (using the 802 on the Windermere otherwise you'll need a 15x or 195 and Northern crew sat up there doing nothing half the time, but being a Northern Lancaster-Carlisle service on the Barrow) in between. In the hour when Barrow got a direct "IC", there would instead be a Barrow-Carlisle connection.

 

[Philip]

Northern should utilise 14 class 175s when they are available, (7 x 2-car and 7 x 3 car), operate them from Longsight and Barrow CS so that each diagram is running as 5 coaches, with a couple of diagrams for maintenance. It should provide good capacity for the route and would give a few years for Northern to order and introduce an extra fleet of bi-modes (cheaper than Azumas) or hybrid trains for the route long term.

The cascaded 195s could then be used to either strengthen Calder Valley services, or replace some Sprinter diagrams within the North West, ie. Chester, Marple, Atherton line, Clitheroe services.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The 185s caused serious overcrowding issues, 2 and a bit coaches of low density Standard were not anywhere near enough on pretty much any service, while even the 3-car all-Standard 195s are filling well. First Class had to some extent become the South East approach, i.e. it was paying for a seat rather than for extra luxury, which i find unacceptable outside of places with major infrastructure constraints. However double 185s would work (subject to SDO/some platform extensions), while TPE operating it using 802s would provide good capacity, the prestige of an InterCity service and First Class which I agree would sell reasonably well to day trippers at the right price.

You might well ask why a two-coach Class 175 service was deemed suitable in the days of Arriva when we boarded a Manchester to Milford Haven service (no first class) at Wilmslow station en route to Shrewsbury, Ludlow, Hereford and Cardiff, four places we often used to visit.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You might well ask why a two-coach Class 175 service was deemed suitable in the days of Arriva when we boarded a Manchester to Milford Haven service (no first class) at Wilmslow station en route to Shrewsbury, Ludlow, Hereford and Cardiff, four places we often used to visit.

There are plenty of services that run with excessively short trains. That doesn't make it sensible to switch from trains that largely do have enough capacity (3-car 195s) to trains that largely don't purely so someone can posh it up a bit.

 

[Kite159]

Best way would be to wire up the Windermere branch, extend platforms and run pairs of 331s from Manchester to/from Windermere every hour.

Barrow line can then be run as a shuttle from either Lancaster or Preston with a clockface hourly timetable using pairs of 156s (or even 158/195s if they can get cleared for the entire coast. Maybe have a couple peak time extras which extend to Manchester if demand is there.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Best way would be to wire up the Windermere branch, extend platforms and run pairs of 331s from Manchester to/from Windermere every hour.

I think to be fair a 4-car would probably be enough. When the "battery 331s" thing was being proposed those were to be 4-cars by adding a coach with batteries to some 3s. Because of the shorter saloons in the end vehicles this would provide similar capacity to 5.802.

Care would need to be taken to ensure good connections both ways to Barrow from the south. If this was difficult to path running to Preston would make more sense (if possible, even as DMUs under the wires) as there are two more Manchesters per hour from there.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Why not do "the unthinkable" and not serve the intermediate stations of Burneside and Staveley?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why not do "the unthinkable" and not serve the intermediate stations of Burneside and Staveley?

What exactly would be gained by not serving them?

(If the answer is "2 minutes on my day out" then that's not a particularly good reason, though it has been the case in the past that the through service didn't serve them, only the two hourly shuttle)

 

[py_megapixel]

For Windermere, back to how it was before, i.e. serving it with a portion of the Blackpool service.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What exactly would be gained by not serving them?

(If the answer is "2 minutes on my day out" then that's not a particularly good reason, though it has been the case in the past that the through service didn't serve them, only the two hourly shuttle)

Is it not the case that a very restrictive speed limit exists at one of those two stations where a minor road crosses the line? Is there any local authority plan to obviate this situation?

 

[adamedwards]

Burneside has an ungated level crossing with a 5mph limit, which of course then makes non stoppers slow right down.
Ideally this ought to be made full barrier with CCTV so as to speed the trains up, but I guess unlikely unless the passing loop at Burneside goes back in to enable a 2 trains per hour shuttle enabling much better main line connections.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jun 2022 ==

You can see the Sharps Lane Burneside crossing here:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.3...-DOTe7W4Zl8AfszXZNIw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

It has the other disadvantage of being at the bottom of the hill up to Staveley, so any train towards Windermere is unable to accelerate out of Burneside on the normal speed curve. A legacy of the minimum cost branch of 1974.

 

[Pinus contorta]

Barrow trains need to run to (at least) Preston and not all terminate at Lancaster. The current lack of onward connections southbound are going to encourage people to go by car if they know they will get marooned at Lancaster for up to an hour.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Burneside has an ungated level crossing with a 5mph limit, which of course then makes non stoppers slow right down.
Ideally this ought to be made full barrier with CCTV so as to speed the trains up, but I guess unlikely unless the passing loop at Burneside goes back in to enable a 2 trains per hour shuttle enabling much better main line connections.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jun 2022 ==

You can see the Sharps Lane Burneside crossing here:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.3...-DOTe7W4Zl8AfszXZNIw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

It has the other disadvantage of being at the bottom of the hill up to Staveley, so any train towards Windermere is unable to accelerate out of Burneside on the normal speed curve. A legacy of the minimum cost branch of 1974.

But again other than de-minimis ("a couple of minutes") what is to be gained by not serving these stations? An hourly service is possible while serving them, and that service doesn't suffer poor resilience as such, the cancellations at present are due to staffing issues due to COVID. A service every 56 minutes isn't useful, and half hourly would be overkill.

 

[Ken H]

Burneside has an ungated level crossing with a 5mph limit, which of course then makes non stoppers slow right down.
Ideally this ought to be made full barrier with CCTV so as to speed the trains up, but I guess unlikely unless the passing loop at Burneside goes back in to enable a 2 trains per hour shuttle enabling much better main line connections.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jun 2022 ==

You can see the Sharps Lane Burneside crossing here:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.3...-DOTe7W4Zl8AfszXZNIw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

It has the other disadvantage of being at the bottom of the hill up to Staveley, so any train towards Windermere is unable to accelerate out of Burneside on the normal speed curve. A legacy of the minimum cost branch of 1974.

Thats a crossing that needs better security. Too easy to hop over the fence to get to the station.

 

[Greybeard33]

I think to be fair a 4-car would probably be enough. When the "battery 331s" thing was being proposed those were to be 4-cars by adding a coach with batteries to some 3s. Because of the shorter saloons in the end vehicles this would provide similar capacity to 5.802.

Care would need to be taken to ensure good connections both ways to Barrow from the south. If this was difficult to path running to Preston would make more sense (if possible, even as DMUs under the wires) as there are two more Manchesters per hour from there.

It has been reported on other threads that Northern intends to use 6-car 195 formations on at least some of the Barrow/Windermere diagrams from December 2022. This is to avoid overcrowding between Preston and Manchester after the service swaps to the Chorley line, with the Preston to Victoria shuttle discontinued.

 

[Some guy]

It has been reported on other threads that Northern intends to use 6-car 195 formations on at least some of the Barrow/Windermere diagrams from December 2022. This is to avoid overcrowding between Preston and Manchester after the service swaps to the Chorley line, with the Preston to Victoria shuttle discontinued.

It would be impossible. 6 car 195’s would only fit in airport, picc, Oxford road, Chorley, Bolton, Preston, Lancaster and that’s about it. Even a 3 car 195 fills up most platforms on the barrow line

 

[Bletchleyite]

It would be impossible. 6 car 195’s would only fit in airport, picc, Oxford road, Chorley, Bolton, Preston, Lancaster and that’s about it. Even a 3 car 195 fills up most platforms on the barrow line

Platform extensions and SDO are to be used. This isn't speculative, it's true.

 

[Some guy]

Platform extensions and SDO are to be used. This isn't speculative, it's true.

It would make sense with 2 car 195’s doubled up

 

[Pinus contorta]

Platform extensions and SDO are to be used. This isn't speculative, it's true.

In the local press a while ago
https://www.nwemail.co.uk/news/1998...cumbria-railway-stations-allow-longer-trains/

 

[cle]

Could these run hourly, and split at Lancaster? Being 6 car for the core piece.

Or if alternating, the other one (definitely the Barrow) should run to Preston. There is probably a balanced mix of London, Liverpool and Manchester (+ Airport) demand - no one destination seems like it would be vastly dominant - and Preston covers all.

Another idea - could Liverpool services be threaded to Barrow?

 

[Pinus contorta]

Could these run hourly, and split at Lancaster? Being 6 car for the core piece.

Or if alternating, the other one (definitely the Barrow) should run to Preston. There is probably a balanced mix of London, Liverpool and Manchester (+ Airport) demand - no one destination seems like it would be vastly dominant - and Preston covers all.

Another idea - could Liverpool services be threaded to Barrow?

Well there used to be an early morning departure around 0700 from Barrow to Liverpool and one if not two mid-afternoon departures from Liverpool to Barrow. One train continued round to Millom arriving there at 1930 ish. So why not? They were culled after First North Western got split up to TPexpress I think. About the same time the VHF Virgin timetable removed 'slower' trains off the WCML.

 

[Agent_Squash]

It would be impossible. 6 car 195’s would only fit in airport, picc, Oxford road, Chorley, Bolton, Preston, Lancaster and that’s about it. Even a 3 car 195 fills up most platforms on the barrow line

Barrow and Carnforth would fit a 6x195 iirc. And really, the only places it has to fit are Barrow, Oxenholme and Windermere. Ulverston, Grange and Carnforth being nice to have for engineering works as well.

If Windermere isn’t going to be electrified, 6x195 (or even 175s) from south of Lancaster makes sense. Now the Airport timetable is settling down a lot more local people use the train on the Cumbrian lines, so withdrawing the Airport service wouldn’t be the best option now the demand has been built up.

Barrow line can then be run as a shuttle from either Lancaster or Preston with a clockface hourly timetable using pairs of 156s (or even 158/195s if they can get cleared for the entire coast. Maybe have a couple peak time extras which extend to Manchester if demand is there.

I don’t get this love of putting older stock in place of 195s on the Furness line - especially if it is a downgrade. Part of the local annoyance with rail in the last few years is the constant swapping from brand new stock back to Sprinters. The fact is, the line has had a sparks effect triggered by the 195s - 3 car 195s are regularly filling up, and I suspect the 6 cars coming in December will increase usage further.

The Cumbria lines are actually a really good example of what happens when you put a good rail service on with decent connections. What needs to happen next is a good cross platform at Barrow to the Cumbrian coast, and a continued focus on reliability. Heck, if a decent effort is put into the Furness line, you could probably justify 2tph.

For Windermere, back to how it was before, i.e. serving it with a portion of the Blackpool service.

Blackpool justifies 6 cars now on its own. Plus as a service group it's far more operationally convenient to have the Cumbrian lines sharing a slot out of the Airport.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Personally, I’d say sort out the hourly Manchester - Lancaster Northern service and make all of those go to Barrow, some even able to go to Millom at certain times.

I’d then run the Windermere as a direct service to Lime Street, in most hours, and then allow the limited TPE service to Glasgow to occupy the paths between Liverpool and Lancaster in the 3 service slots per day.

If you ever got Liverpool to Glasgow to be two-hourly (desirable), then you would just do what you do now and have a two-hourly through service from Windermere and then the shuttle connects with the Anglo-Scot to basically provide an hourly service between Windermere and Liverpool all day.

 

[JonathanH]

What needs to happen next is a good cross platform at Barrow to the Cumbrian coast, and a continued focus on reliability.

It is a difficult balance though. If the trains from Lancaster use the island platform at Barrow, for cross platform interchange, it means passengers for Barrow itself need to use the underpass. Which group of passengers do you favour?

Either that, or a rebuild would be needed.

 

[Ken H]

It is a difficult balance though. If the trains from Lancaster use the island platform at Barrow, for cross platform interchange, it means passengers for Barrow itself need to use the underpass. Which group of passengers do you favour?

Either that, or a rebuild would be needed.

Can't they organise running through trains to Carlisle? So people don't have to change at Barrow? Or is the narrow tunnels north of Workington an insuperable problem? And there are a couple of Lancaster - Barrow - Carlisle trains a day. I assume 156's???

 

[Western Lord]

It is a difficult balance though. If the trains from Lancaster use the island platform at Barrow, for cross platform interchange, it means passengers for Barrow itself need to use the underpass. Which group of passengers do you favour?

Either that, or a rebuild would be needed.

Change the signalling so that both trains can use platform 1, assuming it's long enough.

 

[JonathanH]

Change the signalling so that both trains can use platform 1, assuming it's long enough.

That isn't much more appropriate when there are three platforms available.

 

[Western Lord]

That isn't much more appropriate when there are three platforms available.

Everybody having level access without having to use lifts, bridges, subways etc. is a big advantage.

 

[JonathanH]

Can't they organise running through trains to Carlisle?

It wouldn't be great for reliability and there aren't enough 195s when you take into account the need to run them on other routes.

And there are a couple of Lancaster - Barrow - Carlisle trains a day. I assume 156's???

Yes, 156s. Those make sense at suitable times but running 156s into Manchester just to allow through trains across Barrow isn't a good idea.

 

[Ken H]

It wouldn't be great for reliability and there aren't enough 195s when you take into account the need to run them on other routes.


Yes, 156s. Those make sense at suitable times but running 156s into Manchester just to allow through trains across Barrow isn't a good idea.

spose which is the greater. Changing at Lancaster or changing at Barrow. Having never done either I dont know!