Windermere branch timetable

[Starmill]

there are still obvious cases where there is a benefit, such as between a fast train from London and the Windermere.

There are some more basic issues than this to be honest. If you're leaving London heading for Windermere on a weekday, at 0930, 1030 or 1230, you have to change twice anyway. This is because these services don't call at Oxenholme and they don't offer a connection to a Windermere service that's through from Preston. There are a number of other examples of this happening at various times of the week.

 

[Starmill]

Not only will 195s be 100mph but also have faster acceleration than 185s.

There is also the ongoing issue where the 1128 from Manchester Airport waits for 20 minutes at Lancaster for a path. This means if you're coming from London on the 1030, you have to change at Preston because it doesn't stop at Lancaster. However, you've missed the Windermere train at Preston, so you join the other Glasgow train 15 minutes behind (that came via Birmingham) and then get off that at Lancaster, where your Windermere train has already arrived and awaits. Takt it's not...

 

[Ianno87]

True. Any room at Oxenholme for a 4th platform, which might allow a slightly longer wait there to allow more path flexibility for the return?

I do think we overcomplicate these things, though - a standard hourly pattern is easiest to plan even if it might not be the most resource efficient option.

The problem will come when the perfect hourly pattern to get an hourly Windermere service, and the perfect hourly pattern to get all the various WCML constraints to work (freight over Shap, platforms at Glasgow/Edinburgh, etc) just fundamentally don't (and can't) mesh with each other.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The problem will come when the perfect hourly pattern to get an hourly Windermere service, and the perfect hourly pattern to get all the various WCML constraints to work (freight over Shap, platforms at Glasgow/Edinburgh, etc) just fundamentally don't (and can't) mesh with each other.

Then in a sensible country it's time to tweak the infrastructure so it does.

 

[geoffk]

I'd rather they wired it so as to stop running EMUs under the wires. It's about the cheapest line to do imaginable, as it doesn't require any additional supplies - hooking it to what's there at Oxenholme is adequate for a 4-car EMU.

I agree as surely the difficult bit (Oxenholme platform 3) has been done. Isn't there a study going on into getting the cost down? However the Windermere and Barrow trains interwork at Manchester Airport. Separating them would seem to mean running from both termini to the Airport every two hours, instead of every 3 hours from W'mere, with a one hour/two hour interval from Barrow.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree as surely the difficult bit (Oxenholme platform 3) has been done. Isn't there a study going on into getting the cost down? However the Windermere and Barrow trains interwork at Manchester Airport. Separating them would seem to mean running from both termini to the Airport every two hours, instead of every 3 hours from W'mere, with a one hour/two hour interval from Barrow.

They interwork at the moment but there's no particular reason they couldn't stand alone or interwork with something else 331 operated such as Blackpool expresses. Or you switch to running to Windermere every hour with Barrow a well-timed DMU connection from either Lancaster or Preston.

It always amazes me how many people on here think things like diagrams are immutable when in fact they get changed frequently.

 

[geoffk]

With an electrified route through to Windermere it would make sense operationally to make that the main (hourly) through service but many rail users in Barrow, Grange etc. would object strongly to losing their through service to Manchester. Direct services from Cumbria to Manchester were axed a few years and an effective campaign led by the late Peter Robinson got them reinstated.

 

[Bletchleyite]

With an electrified route through to Windermere it would make sense operationally to make that the main (hourly) through service but many rail users in Barrow, Grange etc. would object strongly to losing their through service to Manchester. Direct services from Cumbria to Manchester were axed a few years and an effective campaign led by the late Peter Robinson got them reinstated.

Such a pity, as I've said many times, Northern did not order bi-modes for this service group. It's difficult to envisage a service group for which they are better suited outside of the InterCity operators.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Then in a sensible country it's time to tweak the infrastructure so it does.

Indeed. The north WCML isn't exactly full, it's hardly the bit south of Northampton. This really should be able to be made to work, even if it requires new rolling stock e.g. 125mph bi-modes.

My personal view (though this is getting a bit Speculative Ideas, I'll spawn a new thread if it goes too far that way) is that all trains should call at all stations between Preston and Carlisle. There are only a few of them anyway and it would allow better connectivity, and if they all have the same pattern they won't catch each other up.

 

[Greybeard33]

They interwork at the moment but there's no particular reason they couldn't stand alone or interwork with something else 331 operated such as Blackpool expresses. Or you switch to running to Windermere every hour with Barrow a well-timed DMU connection from either Lancaster or Preston.

It always amazes me how many people on here think things like diagrams are immutable when in fact they get changed frequently.

Sorry, but there is a particular reason for not doing any of those things - they would require a major recast of the WCML timetable. This would affect Avanti and TPE, and probably have repercussions on LNR, ScotRail and other operators even further afield. It would likely take at least two years to design and implement and might well get ruled out as a case of "the tail wagging the dog".

Under the current timetable, the Windermere service could not interwork with the Blackpool at the Airport. They arrive and depart at different times and both have very short layovers.

And there is no path for a "well-timed DMU connection" to follow the Windermere service from Lancaster to Carnforth without getting in the way of an Avanti express.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And there is no path for a "well-timed DMU connection" to follow the Windermere service from Lancaster to Carnforth without getting in the way of an Avanti express.

Erm, in the hours when there isn't a through Barrow a 75mph DMU does follow it up to Carnforth, doesn't it? Or is the connection off the TPE instead?

 

[Greybeard33]

Erm, in the hours when there isn't a through Barrow a 75mph DMU does follow it up to Carnforth, doesn't it? Or is the connection off the TPE instead?

Timings vary a bit between hours. The Windermere train is sandwiched between the two Avanti expresses. The Carlisle via Barrow service departs Lancaster about 5 minutes after the second Avanti and gets to Barrow about 15 minutes later than the direct service from the Airport does in the other hours. I would not call that a well-timed connection - the wait at Lancaster is about 10 minutes.

(I am referring to the post-May 2020 timetable, in which the Airport services are timed for 195s and the Windermere service stops at Lancaster, instead of skipping it as now.)

 

[HSP 2]

I'm not sure why this thread has gone on so long, the Windermere branch is about 10 miles long serving two towns Kendal and Windermere. It should have been electrified when the WCML was, but was put off and then put off time and time again.
With the following populations Kendal (3) 28,800 & Windermere (10) 8,500 add say 1,500 so a population of approx. 38,800.

The Furness line is about 30 miles but if you take it to St Bees 62 miles with the following populations Barrow (2) 56,800 Ulverston (7) 11,800 Dalton (12) 8,150 & Grange over Sands (20) 4,160 so a population of approx. 80,910. That is not taking into account any place north of Barrow.
The numbers in brackets are the position the town is in size in Cumbria.
So looking at the population figures do you still think that it would make sense to cut the Furness line services?
I did not take into account Carnforth as it's not in Cumbria.

The reason that I mention St. Bees is that it is about half way between Barrow and Carlisle. It only works out as number 39 in the chart with a population of 1,800.

The connections from Barrow can be bad going north by just missing the train before you get to Lancaster, going south it's not normally to bad at least you don't see them going past you.

 

[Bovverboy]

Could someone, with reasonable confidence, tell me how passenger traffic between the Windermere branch and points north (Penrith, Carlisle, etc) compares with traffic towards the south, i.e. Lancaster, Preston, and beyond. Plenty of contributors to this forum will have travelled on through Manchester to Windermere services and hopefully noticed how many people board or alight at Oxenholme. It's reasonable to suppose that most doing that will be passengers on/off the Scottish services - I don't imagine that Oxenholme itself will be much of a traffic source, although I could be wrong on that, I suppose.
Yes, I know the above will give a slightly distorted picture, on average only a third of passengers on/off the Scottish services will transfer to/from the through Manchester - Windermere services, whereas a higher proportion of those travelling to/from the south are likely to travel on the through services, simply because of what they are (i.e. through services).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Interesting re connections - in UK terms 10 minutes seems decent.

 

[Greybeard33]

Interesting re connections - in UK terms 10 minutes seems decent.

Southbound after May, the service from Carlisle via Barrow will arrrive Lancaster just after the service from Windermere has departed. You will have to wait for the TPE, arriving at the Airport half an hour later than the ex-Windermere.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Southbound after May, the service from Carlisle via Barrow will arrrive Lancaster just after the service from Windermere has departed. You will have to wait for the TPE, arriving at the Airport half an hour later than the ex-Windermere.

That's unfortunate, but I assume unavoidable without as you say messing with the WCML timetable. Regarding 10 minutes northbound, though, to me that's a fairly optimal connection as far as the UK goes; 5 minutes is too tight because our operations aren't "neat" enough to ensure in normal operation you don't get sloppy losses of a minute or two here and there, and on a 5 minute connection that can be rather stressful, particularly if you don't know the station concerned. I generally won't consider a connection of fewer than 10 minutes at present, and the unit will be there so it's not like anyone will be standing in the cold northbound.

Would there be a path for the ex-Barrow to continue to Preston (but not beyond) where there are far more connections? How would use of a 100mph unit e.g. a 195 or 170, if they could be cleared for the Coast, affect that?

 

[The Bear]

As the WCML & Windermere branch are my local lines I suppose I better wade into this one.....

The north WCML isn't exactly full, it's hardly the bit south of Northampton.

You're correct but unlike south of Northampton where the WCML is 4-track & fairly flat we're talking about a 2-track steeply graded & curvaceous section of line where a class4 75mph freight may have a loco hauling it that's permitted to run at 75mph but is incapable of maintaining that speed on the climbs with the train that it's hauling.
On the down what appears to look like loads of spare capacity by grouping the passenger services into a 30min window every hour is to give at least 1 freight path per hour.
All of this effects when the through services off/onto the branch can be pathed which in turn has a knock on effect on the Oxenholme-Windermere shuttles which is why the Lakes Line doesn't have a clock face timetable.

all trains should call at all stations between Preston and Carlisle. There are only a few of them anyway and it would allow better connectivity, and if they all have the same pattern they won't catch each other up.

I couldn't agree with you more as the skip-stop timetable has over the years served to kill off any commuting between Penrith & Oxenholme not to mention the fact it completely falls apart when there's disruption.

Could someone, with reasonable confidence, tell me how passenger traffic between the Windermere branch and points north (Penrith, Carlisle, etc) compares with traffic towards the south, i.e. Lancaster, Preston, and beyond. Plenty of contributors to this forum will have travelled on through Manchester to Windermere services and hopefully noticed how many people board or alight at Oxenholme. It's reasonable to suppose that most doing that will be passengers on/off the Scottish services - I don't imagine that Oxenholme itself will be much of a traffic source, although I could be wrong on that, I suppose.
Yes, I know the above will give a slightly distorted picture, on average only a third of passengers on/off the Scottish services will transfer to/from the through Manchester - Windermere services, whereas a higher proportion of those travelling to/from the south are likely to travel on the through services, simply because of what they are (i.e. through services).

Even without the Lakes Line interchange and nearby Kendal believe it or not Oxenholme has a massive catchment area encompassing; the Western Dales, south end of the Eden Valley, the Lyth Valley, southern/central Lakes & over into Furness.
(Those from Furness either consider it easier to drive to Oxenholme than the change at Lancaster or don't trust the reliability of NT.)
A private house with land across the road from the station has built a private carpark to serve the station which is usually 75% full on top of the two station car parks.

As for interchange to/from the Lakes Line;
Very few interchange from a Manchester-Windermere onto a Scottish bound service as TPE's services timings are more attractive as they don't have any pathing stops.
There's a very small proportion (manly tourists) who change to/from Edinburgh but most passengers who transit to/from Windermere usually change from/onto services to/from the south.
User groups claim more people travel on the through services but I would argue that collectively the shuttles convey more passengers who have arrived from further south.

If nobody believes me the latest station usage figures were released not that long ago - if I find a link to it I'll post it.
Without going into detail, essentially all Lakes Line stations (Kendal, Burneside, Staveley & Windermere) suffered a drop in passengers but Oxenholme saw a 9% increase…….

 

[Staffordian]

If nobody believes me the latest station usage figures were released not that long ago - if I find a link to it I'll post it.
Without going into detail, essentially all Lakes Line stations (Kendal, Burneside, Staveley & Windermere) suffered a drop in passengers but Oxenholme saw a 9% increase…….

Do you think this may be partly related to the temporary closure of the line post the May 2018 t/t ?
Would obviously cause a drop in branch passengers, but also an increase for Oxenholme with locals driving there instead.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do you think this may be partly related to the temporary closure of the line post the May 2018 t/t ?
Would obviously cause a drop in branch passengers, but also an increase for Oxenholme with locals driving there instead.

That and Northern's utter lack of reliability?

With regard to the branch, do you think it'd be better as an hourly clockface shuttle? Are the through services well used in your understanding, or do more people just change at Oxenholme for London (who are maybe now driving there)? That is, does the through service have value?

 

[Greybeard33]

Would there be a path for the ex-Barrow to continue to Preston (but not beyond) where there are far more connections? How would use of a 100mph unit e.g. a 195 or 170, if they could be cleared for the Coast, affect that

There is one through service per day each way between Preston and the Cumbrian Coast. The southbound is late in the evening, but the northbound departs Preston at 1532. It has a 20 minute dwell at Lancaster, so Manchester passengers will get the quickest journey by changing from the following Windermere service that overtakes at Lancaster (once it stops there). However, passengers from Liverpool will have the same journey time, and one fewer changes, if they board the 1532 at Preston, rather than taking an express from Preston to Lancaster.

Personally I think 2-car 195s would be ideal for the Cumbrian Coast. Nice spacious seating layout, with tables, and the lack of seats less of an issue than on suburban services. The acceleration would enable a substantial journey time reduction despite the low linespeed. But I very much doubt I will see it in my lifetime!

At least the 156s now on the Coast are a major upgrade from the Pacers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Personally I think 2-car 195s would be ideal for the Cumbrian Coast. Nice spacious seating layout, with tables, and the lack of seats less of an issue than on suburban services. The acceleration would enable a substantial journey time reduction despite the low linespeed.

Agreed, and it could form part of a recast with an improved service pattern, perhaps you could run a pair of units from Preston to Barrow then the front two go forward. But this is going rather Speculative Ideas

 

[Staffordian]

That and Northern's utter lack of reliability?

According to ontimetrains.co.uk, Windermere is a ‘Top 500’ station for reliability - 408th out of 2621 over the last six months. And even better more recently - 277th over last 12 weeks and 222nd over the last four.
Of course, this may have been a different story for much of 2018-19, but the Lakes line now seems to compare well with most other places.

 

[HSP 2]

Personally I think 2-car 195s would be ideal for the Cumbrian Coast. Nice spacious seating layout, with tables, and the lack of seats less of an issue than on suburban services. The acceleration would enable a substantial journey time reduction despite the low linespeed. But I very much doubt I will see it in my lifetime!

At least the 156s now on the Coast are a major upgrade from the Pacers.

IIRC I think that there is a problem using any thing that is C3 restricted up the coast north of Workington ? (it could be Sellafield).
A lot of the problems are due to the curves and the narrow 6' on the Maryport to Carlisle section. At least one (195) has worked to Millom!

I'm not sure what the C restriction is on the 195s must have a better look before I board, that's if they have it on?

 

[Bletchleyite]

IIRC I think that there is a problem using any thing that is C3 restricted up the coast north of Workington ? (it could be Sellafield).
A lot of the problems are due to the curves and the narrow 6' on the Maryport to Carlisle section. At least one (195) has worked to Millom!

I'm not sure what the C restriction is on the 195s must have a better look before I board, that's if they have it on?

153s and 156s are C3, aren't they? And 150s, which are not allowed, are C1, so are Pacers which are allowed. It's more specific than the length.

 

[S&CLER]

As the WCML & Windermere branch are my local lines I suppose I better wade into this one.....

You're correct but unlike south of Northampton where the WCML is 4-track & fairly flat we're talking about a 2-track steeply graded & curvaceous section of line where a class4 75mph freight may have a loco hauling it that's permitted to run at 75mph but is incapable of maintaining that speed on the climbs with the train that it's hauling.
On the down what appears to look like loads of spare capacity by grouping the passenger services into a 30min window every hour is to give at least 1 freight path per hour.
All of this effects when the through services off/onto the branch can be pathed which in turn has a knock on effect on the Oxenholme-Windermere shuttles which is why the Lakes Line doesn't have a clock face timetable.


I couldn't agree with you more as the skip-stop timetable has over the years served to kill off any commuting between Penrith & Oxenholme not to mention the fact it completely falls apart when there's disruption.



Even without the Lakes Line interchange and nearby Kendal believe it or not Oxenholme has a massive catchment area encompassing; the Western Dales, south end of the Eden Valley, the Lyth Valley, southern/central Lakes & over into Furness.
(Those from Furness either consider it easier to drive to Oxenholme than the change at Lancaster or don't trust the reliability of NT.)
A private house with land across the road from the station has built a private carpark to serve the station which is usually 75% full on top of the two station car parks.

As for interchange to/from the Lakes Line;
Very few interchange from a Manchester-Windermere onto a Scottish bound service as TPE's services timings are more attractive as they don't have any pathing stops.
There's a very small proportion (manly tourists) who change to/from Edinburgh but most passengers who transit to/from Windermere usually change from/onto services to/from the south.
User groups claim more people travel on the through services but I would argue that collectively the shuttles convey more passengers who have arrived from further south.

If nobody believes me the latest station usage figures were released not that long ago - if I find a link to it I'll post it.
Without going into detail, essentially all Lakes Line stations (Kendal, Burneside, Staveley & Windermere) suffered a drop in passengers but Oxenholme saw a 9% increase…….

Oxenholme was for a time a good railhead for buses to Sedbergh, a very attractive tourist town, but the current bus service is all but useless for a day in Sedbergh. On the other hand the former 564 bus from Kendal to Kirkby Stephen via Sedbergh and Ravenstonedale was empty beyond Sedbergh on the 3 or 4 occasions when I caught it at Oxenholme to travel that way. It seemed to cater mainly for shoppers/students going to Kendal.

 

[HSP 2]

153s and 156s are C3, aren't they? And 150s, which are not allowed, are C1, so are Pacers which are allowed. It's more specific than the length.

If that's what you know please tell me more. I think that the problem with the 150s was due to some parts catching some of the low platforms.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If that's what you know please tell me more. I think that the problem with the 150s was due to some parts catching some of the low platforms.

I'm not an expert on the matter, but it isn't down to vehicle length in this specific case, it's down to width and what sticks out. 150s are wider and so clout something or other. Pacers are wider still but very short vehicles so presumably get away with it on those grounds. 195s, who knows - they are quite narrow but also 24m long rather than 23m of other "long" stock.

C1 is 20m (Mk1/Mk2 profile), C3 is 23m (Mk3 profile including things like 156s).

 

[Zooty]

I would not call that a well-timed connection - the wait at Lancaster is about 10 minutes.

That sounds like an absolutely perfect connection to me, given the minimum at Lancaster is 6 minutes.

 

[Zooty]

There is one through service per day each way between Preston and the Cumbrian Coast. The southbound is late in the evening, but the northbound departs Preston at 1532. It has a 20 minute dwell at Lancaster, so Manchester passengers will get the quickest journey by changing from the following Windermere service that overtakes at Lancaster (once it stops there). However, passengers from Liverpool will have the same journey time, and one fewer changes, if they board the 1532 at Preston, rather than taking an express from Preston to Lancaster.

And that 1532 is formed of a 156 that runs ECS from Lancaster having just worked from Carlisle. Presumably no conductor is rostered for that section?