XC WCML

[irish_rail]

You don't run hourly services 363 days per year because Mr & Mrs Smith might want a hiking weekend in the Lake District.

Whoever said hourly services?! What is being proposed is SOME trains providing people of the SW a chance to travel to the NW without having a change at New St , and importantly allowing those from the NW a chance to get SW without over an hour connection at New St. Last time I looked, plenty of people from NW England do infact like to visit the west country, and plenty of people down here visit places like Liverpool , and the Lakes etc. Your example of Totnes to Penrith every hour is frankly ridiculous. 3 or 4 direct trains a day would do nicely.

 

[irish_rail]

You don't run hourly services 363 days per year because Mr & Mrs Smith might want a hiking weekend in the Lake District.

Similarly, at present Mr and Mrs Smith have an hourly Totnes service to Darlington. I rather suspect an occasional diversion of that service to the Lake District would be rather more well used.....

 

[dk1]

It’s possible but again it comes down to traincrew traction and route knowledge. Both are very expensive to correct and along with ex-TOCs respective conditions of service will continue to hold back many changes. It’s all very deep routed.

 

[lrbvoyager]

Whoever said hourly services?! What is being proposed is SOME trains providing people of the SW a chance to travel to the NW without having a change at New St , and importantly allowing those from the NW a chance to get SW without over an hour connection at New St. Last time I looked, plenty of people from NW England do infact like to visit the west country, and plenty of people down here visit places like Liverpool , and the Lakes etc. Your example of Totnes to Penrith every hour is frankly ridiculous. 3 or 4 direct trains a day would do nicely.

In addition 221s can tilt however it would be need to be enabled again

 

[cle]

I'm not certain but I'm also leaning towards the Bristol service being the one to be cut back. It would definitely make sense to extend the route somewhere from New St, but the main issue with an extension to Derby or Nottingham would be that the Voyagers aren't particularly suitable for these regional services, unless of course you converted the entire route to 170s.

I think to Derby (getting to Sheffield would be amazing,) - would be fine with Voyagers, as that is the stock today. The Nottingham has a more local nature at that end, I agree.

And as it would be adding frequency on that Derby-Brum trunk route, perhaps stopping patterns could be amended to even them out, or run non-stop just ahead of a Burton/Tamworth calling service.

 

[Topological]

Could the Bristol be slightly recast to go round Camp Hill to Bristol? Appreciate that does not add much capacity on other routes, but leaves the Manchester path open for a 350/2 type operation. Frees a couple of voyagers too.

 

[lrbvoyager]

XC is taking on 350/2?

Could the Bristol be slightly recast to go round Camp Hill to Bristol? Appreciate that does not add much capacity on other routes, but leaves the Manchester path open for a 350/2 type operation. Frees a couple of voyagers

 

[Topological]

XC is taking on 350/2?

No, the question was about XC operations on the WCML and what can change within the constraints of available stock/lines.

The rationale for 350/2s in this thread is simply that they are suitable for a Manchester-Birmingham service and offer more capacity as 8-car.

 

[The Planner]

Could the Bristol be slightly recast to go round Camp Hill to Bristol? Appreciate that does not add much capacity on other routes, but leaves the Manchester path open for a 350/2 type operation. Frees a couple of voyagers too.

Manchester Bristol service group does this already.

 

[Topological]

Manchester Bristol service group does this already.

True, i always forget what is booked Camp Hill and what is flexible about which route it uses. Therefore, given the train has a path over Camp Hill in one direction it would either be a case of the train from Bristol terminating in the A end at New Street and going back out over the Camp Hill, or finding a path through University.

The end result would be a Bristol to Birmingham shuttle in either case.

 

[bananas]

The logic was that the majority of XC journeys could be made by alternative, often faster, routes on vastly superior rolling stock

I'm surprised by this. I hate XC for obvious reasons but have travelled on it many times - because it was the fastest route. Surely every full-and-standing XC train I've suffered on is full of similar people. Are my journey habits that unrepresentative? How did DfT reach this conclusion?

 

[Sonik]

It could change, but only once HS2 opens. Since there will be a desire to run a Curzon St-Manchester service, the current Bristol-Manchester service can be rerouted to Glasgow/Edinburgh. However running anything to Manchester via HS2 puts pressure on paths through Colwich, requiring split/joins at Crewe for London services.

It's interesting that it was announced to proceed with Bodersly chord on the west(south) side only.

This only works if you terminate XC at Moor Street and they go no further. Moor Street is adjacent to Curzon Street, but not so close to New Street

Overall, this suggests to me an intention to provide future northbound services mainly via HS2. Albeit with the issues around Colwich, this does provide some relief to New Street

 

[cle]

It's interesting that it was announced to proceed with Bodersly chord on the west(south) side only.

This only works if you terminate XC at Moor Street and they go no further. Moor Street is adjacent to Curzon Street, but not so close to New Street

Overall, this suggests to me an intention to provide future northbound services mainly via HS2. Albeit with the issues around Colwich, this does provide some relief to New Street

The way I took it was the 1tph to each of Cardiff, Bristol, Hereford were all additional services out of Moor St. Plus Camp Hill relocation to enable the cross-city 6tph again?

In other words, not at the expense of XC services today.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Whoever said hourly services?! What is being proposed is SOME trains providing people of the SW a chance to travel to the NW without having a change at New St , and importantly allowing those from the NW a chance to get SW without over an hour connection at New St. Last time I looked, plenty of people from NW England do infact like to visit the west country, and plenty of people down here visit places like Liverpool , and the Lakes etc. Your example of Totnes to Penrith every hour is frankly ridiculous. 3 or 4 direct trains a day would do nicely.

Don't you work on the railway? If so I would have thought you would understand 3 or 4 trains per day isn't how things are now. The 1970s and 1980s are long gone and InterCity services run to set patterns throughout the day. If you are suggesting additional services, as opposed to replacing the Avanti via Birmingham service, then your suggestion is even more ridiculous. Precisely how many trains between Preston and Scotland do you think are required? How would additional services be pathed when passenger services are already bunched to permit an hourly freight path?

 

[Sonik]

The way I took it was the 1tph to each of Cardiff, Bristol, Hereford were all additional services out of Moor St. Plus Camp Hill relocation to enable the cross-city 6tph again?

In other words, not at the expense of XC services today.

I'm not sure it has such benefit for Cross City, because XC already runs via Camp Hill and new Camp Hill services were proposed to use New Street via Proof House temporarily.

But regardless I agree it's unlikely to have any immediate impact on XC, because any alternative (using HS2) is still a long way off.

 

[The Planner]

I'm not sure it has such benefit for Cross City, because XC already runs via Camp Hill and new Camp Hill services were proposed to use New Street via Proof House temporarily.

But regardless I agree it's unlikely to have any immediate impact on XC, because any alternative (using HS2) is still a long way off.

You need to fix Kings Norton if you want 6tph back with the status quo.

 

[daodao]

Whoever said hourly services?! What is being proposed is SOME trains providing people of the SW a chance to travel to the NW without having a change at New St , and importantly allowing those from the NW a chance to get SW without over an hour connection at New St. Last time I looked, plenty of people from NW England do infact like to visit the west country, and plenty of people down here visit places like Liverpool , and the Lakes etc. Your example of Totnes to Penrith every hour is frankly ridiculous. 3 or 4 direct trains a day would do nicely.

It is much simpler to keep the ex LNWR and ex MR main line services running via New Street completely separate, particularly now and for the foreseeable future when the former are electric and the latter diesel.
Therefore, I would remove XC from all services via Wolverhampton, i.e. onto the WCML, accepting that existing timetables would need significant revision.

People travelling from SW England to NW England and the West of Scotland can make a simple change at New Street.

 

[cle]

I'm not sure it has such benefit for Cross City, because XC already runs via Camp Hill and new Camp Hill services were proposed to use New Street via Proof House temporarily.

But regardless I agree it's unlikely to have any immediate impact on XC, because any alternative (using HS2) is still a long way off.

That’s what I meant - they’ll start at New St (which will make platforms / pathing for cross-city harder - especially if terminating) but eventually they will migrate to Moor Street, and free up some space at NS.

 

[Harpo]

People travelling from SW England to NW England and the West of Scotland can make a simple change at New Street.

An oxymoron. Especially if you emerge from the subterranean shot hole at the south end.

 

[daodao]

An oxymoron. Especially if you emerge from the subterranean shot hole at the south end.

Passengers from SW England to North Wales and NW England also have the choice of changing at Newport.

 

[Harpo]

Passengers from SW England to North Wales and NW England also have the choice of changing at Newport.

Adding a change at Exeter or Bristol too since GWR split the Cardiff service.

 

[BranstonJnc]

Divert one XC to Liverpool, as the 'fast' path, allowing it to give the connectivity at Crewe to a wider array of places.

Keep the other XC to Manchester as an 8 / 9 car.

And then get West Mids to operate the remaining 'slow' Liverpool, and the other Manchester via Macclesfield, preferably with a Congleton stop as Congleton remains horrifically underserved.

And if West Mids / XC can flight their trains accordingly, you could get the WMT Manchester / Liverpool to stop at Smethwick, which means journeys like Kidderminster / Worcester to Manchester or Liverpool become significantly easier. Likewise, journeys from the south side of Birmingham don't require a walk across from Moor Street to New Street.

And whilst you're there, return the Birmingham - Scotland service via Preston to just that: none of this from London malarkey that constantly trashes its punctuality. That would allow a half-hourly Avanti from Birmingham to Wolves, as the one from London would have to extend to Wolves.

 

[Topological]

Divert one XC to Liverpool, as the 'fast' path, allowing it to give the connectivity at Crewe to a wider array of places.

Keep the other XC to Manchester as an 8 / 9 car.

And then get West Mids to operate the remaining 'slow' Liverpool, and the other Manchester via Macclesfield, preferably with a Congleton stop as Congleton remains horrifically underserved.

And if West Mids / XC can flight their trains accordingly, you could get the WMT Manchester / Liverpool to stop at Smethwick, which means journeys like Kidderminster / Worcester to Manchester or Liverpool become significantly easier. Likewise, journeys from the south side of Birmingham don't require a walk across from Moor Street to New Street.

And whilst you're there, return the Birmingham - Scotland service via Preston to just that: none of this from London malarkey that constantly trashes its punctuality. That would allow a half-hourly Avanti from Birmingham to Wolves, as the one from London would have to extend to Wolves.

That just takes more voyagers under the wires.

Currently, the services interwork at Manchester so a Bristol arrival becomes a Bournemouth. Reducing that to 1 service means a long dwell for your 8/9 car voyagers.

You could save a little by not sending the other service beyond Birmingham, but Liverpool will be a longer journey than Manchester. There will then be a long layover for that voyager in Liverpool (though not as long as the replacement in the Manchester path will have in Manchester).

There is a reason most suggestions are involving cutting one of the voyager services back rather than simply sending one somewhere else. If the voyagers do go through Stafford then having them interworking at Manchester is the most efficient.

 

[Falcon1200]

People travelling from SW England to NW England and the West of Scotland can make a simple change at New Street.

I have been using New Street fir over 50 years and still do not find the change at all 'simple'! Never mind for the occasional leisure traveller, with luggage, kids, bikes etc. Forcing even more passengers to change at New Street is the last thing they need.

 

[Harpo]

return the Birmingham - Scotland service via Preston to just that: none of this from London malarkey that constantly trashes its punctuality. That would allow a half-hourly Avanti from Birmingham to Wolves, as the one from London would have to extend to Wolves.

Reducing Euston to Birmingham from 3TPH to 2TPH?