New London Midland timetable

[jaigee]

I wonder if LM spent as long on the timetable as we have?

I doubt it, and they have finished, we haven't yet!

 

[martinsh]

First day of new timetable and the 0804 Liverpool - Birmingham was a 350/1 not a 350/2 as diagrammed.

I'm not complaining, but it is a poor show when they can't get it right on the first day

 

[Pumbaa]

LM? Unable to diagram?

Quelle surprise.

 

[dvboy]

The 0937 Wolves - Birmingham was a double 170 this morning. It used to be a single 170 with a 15? attached to the front.

 

[Roverman]

Wonder if the drivers still comment on this or have they just given up?

 

[Realfish]

Just picked up a copy of the new Crewe to Euston timetable this morning.

One small irritation is that LM have, lazily, foreshortened station names. Lichfield Trent Valley is now 'Lichfield'. Not a big problem for those in the know, but I bet someone who isn't, will one day turn up in the city centre to catch a direct London service.

Where a town or city has two or more stations their designated names should be used.

 

[Class172]

As I got off the train at Droitwich Spa an hour ago, I noticed that that the 1633 service to Birmingham New Street had a note on the display boards saying 'front 3 coaches for Bromsgrove'. Now this service used to be operated by a 2 car 150 and for many years I have asked for it to be extended - therefore I am wondering if it has been to at least 4 coaches I presume, and also what it will be formed of (will it be a 150+? combo?). If anyone can confirm this working that would be good, otherwise I'll tell you all tomorrow after I catch it home from school.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The 0937 Wolves - Birmingham was a double 170 this morning. It used to be a single 170 with a 15? attached to the front.

That will be a 170/5 + 153 combo.

 

[Goatboy]

As I got off the train at Droitwich Spa an hour ago, I noticed that that the 1633 service to Birmingham New Street had a note on the display boards saying 'front 3 coaches for Bromsgrove'.

I had a similar thing the other day on a Hereford to New Street 170. The guard announced only the front 3 coaches would be inline with the platform.

It was a 3 coach unit....

 

[bILLOO]

Does anyone know if the negative easement preventing northbound journeys from Northampton going via Milton Keynes has been amended?

London Midland informed me via email (and also indicated earlier in this thread) that they were going to implement this for the timetable change but journey planners suggest it has not been implemented.

Really hope so. Would prefer to travel via MKC for Manchester rather than Birmingham.

 

[martinsh]

To get the 18.39 from Stafford to Stone it leaves only a 4 minute connection at Stafford (or 10 minute if you catch the rammed Cross Country train at 17.57). Both trains can easly exeed those connection times with their average daily delays, so i'd often (probably more often than not) miss my last train of the day to Stone.

Observation of first day of new timetable suggests that the connection at Stafford is pretty safe unless there are massive delays. The Euston train arrives on platform 3, and has to wait while the BHM - Liverpool crosses onto the fast line in front of it.

There are also now later trains to Stone, though the next one still misses out Stafford for some reason (route knowledge ?).

And, as a last resort, buses from Stafford to Stone run every 15 mins and taken 30 mins ...

 

[Eagle]

One small irritation is that LM have, lazily, foreshortened station names. Lichfield Trent Valley is now 'Lichfield'. Not a big problem for those in the know, but I bet someone who isn't, will one day turn up in the city centre to catch a direct London service.

Seems to have been fixed in the online PDFs though.

 

[Hadders]

I have emailed London Midland asking if the easement on journeys from Northampton via Milton Keynes has been amended. Unfortunately they are over a month behind on answering queries according to their website!

 

[Class172]

Having caught the train I had been referring to earlier, I can confirm that it is advertised as a 5 carriage service, which I found a lovely surprise; only to find out that the last 2 carriages were locked out of use — why would this be (the train had come from Hereford)?

 

[calc7]

Doesn't Bromsgrove Up only have platform space for 3 coaches?

 

[martinsh]

one of them is the 1736 ex Stafford which I often catch. Anyone taking bets as to how long I'll have to wait before that turns up as a 350/2 ? My guess is less that a week ...

I win my bet ! It was 350257 today ...
(second day of new timetable)

 

[Class172]

Doesn't Bromsgrove Up only have platform space for 3 coaches?

Surely though SDO can be used at Bromsgrove (the 170/6 is usually at the front anyhow so there could just be an announcement at stations saying only the front 3 carriages will call at Bromsgrove)?

 

[MK Tom]

Just used my first accelerated service... I can confirm 110mph on a 350 is cool!!! It was a little late due to the wire problems on the Northampton loop messing everything up and the driver seemed to be positively flooring it to catch up. The saving in traveling from MKC to Nuneaton is very noticeable. Incidentally today's disruption shows how the service has basically been immunised against the many infrastructure issues that regularly plague the Northampton loop.

 

[MCR247]

Just used my first accelerated service... I can confirm 110mph on a 350 is cool!!! It was a little late due to the wire problems on the Northampton loop messing everything up and the driver seemed to be positively flooring it to catch up. The saving in traveling from MKC to Nuneaton is very noticeable. Incidentally today's disruption shows how the service has basically been immunised against the many infrastructure issues that regularly plague the Northampton loop.

Intentional?

 

[Hadders]

London Midland have replied to my query about the easement from Northampton to the north via Milton Keynes:

Dear Hadders,

I refer to my e-mail to you of 17 December 2012.

I have now received a response from our Pricing Manager who has informed me
that the Easements has been actioned by ATOC and are now working.

Once again, thank you for contacting us.


Yours sincerely,

Xxxx Xxxx
Customer Relations Advisor

London Midland, P O Box 4323, Birmingham, B2 4QT

Strangely, the easement does not work on LM's booking site (or other Webtis sites) but does work on Trainline powered sites.

Also the easements section of the routeing guide has not been updated.

 

[calc7]

Strangely, the easement does not work on LM's booking site (or other Webtis sites) but does work on Trainline powered sites.

Also the easements section of the routeing guide has not been updated.

Trainline-powered sites have always allowed me to do MAN->MKC->NMP on some itineraries, but funnily enough not the other way round.

 

[AndyLandy]

So, the May 2012 and December 2012 timetable changeover dates have come and gone, but this seems to have disappeared off the face of the Earth:

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=38095

Anyone know what happened to these plans? I really liked the idea of LM running services Euston-Liverpool and Birmingham-Preston. Especially the notion that Hartford station might once again regain a Northbound service to Warrington and beyond.

 

[MCR247]

The ORR declined it if I remember correctly

I believe 'revenue extraction' was the reason?

 

[All Line Rover]

The ORR declined it if I remember correctly

I believe 'revenue extraction' was the reason?

Indeed. If people stuck to travelling with LM, a Liverpool to London SOR could have dropped from c.£300 to c.£100, and a Preston to Birmingham SOR could have dropped from c.£90 to c.£50. How awful that would have been!

 

[tbtc]

Can you imagine the outcry if XC proposed cutting the Birmingham - Manchester service in half? Yet people seem to be in favour of LM cutting the Birmingham - Liverpool service in half.

Hopefully LM can concentrate on running trains in their heartland and stop these ambitions to run faster London services/ extend to Preston!

 

[All Line Rover]

Can you imagine the outcry if XC proposed cutting the Birmingham - Manchester service in half? Yet people seem to be in favour of LM cutting the Birmingham - Liverpool service in half.

Hopefully LM can concentrate on running trains in their heartland and stop these ambitions to run faster London services/ extend to Preston!

But the Birmingham to Manchester services are wedged with passengers travelling all the way through. The Liverpool to Birmingham services are generally quieter and, when busy, are mostly full of passengers travelling between Liverpool and Crewe and, especially, Stafford and Birmingham. Both flows would continue to have been served at the same frequency despite the changes. One train per hour is sufficient for through travel between Liverpool/Runcorn and Wolverhampton/Birmingham, and there would still have been two extra journey opportunities per hour for these passengers with a change at Stafford.

What is there more demand for? Two Liverpool to Birmingham services per hour, or two Liverpool to London services per hour AND two Preston to Birmingham services per hour? Nobody is in favour of cutting services, but when minor changes to service patterns can create strong competition between TOCs, many of us are completely in favour of that!

 

[tbtc]

What is there more demand for? Two Liverpool to Birmingham services per hour, or two Liverpool to London services per hour?

I could equally ask what there is more demand for - two Birmingham - Liverpool services an hour (and one to Preston) or two Birmingham - Preston services an hour (and just one to Liverpool).

Bearing in mind that the Birmingham - Preston service is going to see longer trains in a few years (as will the other Wigan - Preston service).

It's all about cheap tickets though, I guess.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Can you imagine the outcry if XC proposed cutting the Birmingham - Manchester service in half?

Ah, depends if you count the current Birmingham New St-Liverpool service as inter-city, like Birmingham New St-Manchester Piccadilly is. I certainly wouldn't.

BHM-LIV is usually 7-8 stops on commuter-styled 350/2s, taking in excess of 1h40 to cover under 90 miles, serving the likes of Penkridge and Acton Bridge on the way. BHM-MAN is on 125mph stock (I don't know how often that's reached, should certainly be in effect between Wolves and Stoke though), with onboard catering, First Class service (as oppose to the London commuter-type provision on LM), with 5-6 calls, taking under 90 mins on half of the services.

Liverpool is odd in that it seemingly commands little inter-city provision (only 1tph to London and no XC). I'll be honest and say that I don't think Birmingham-Liverpool direct is in any way as busy or comparable to the service to Manchester.

 

[All Line Rover]

Bearing in mind that the Birmingham - Preston service is going to see longer trains in a few years (as will the other Wigan - Preston service).

Yes, an increase of just 64 Standard Class seats per service. Simply incredibly. And that's if they decide to go with 9-car Pendolinos, which is unlikely. 6-car Pendolinos would likely have 5 Standard Class carriages (same as 9-car) and just 1 First Class carriage.

Demand between Birmingham and Preston is greater than that. If we can have an increased number of services, cheaper tickets, and the only passengers to lose out are those travelling between Liverpool/Runcorn and Wolverhampton/Birmingham (whose losses, given that they only involve a reduction of 2tph to 1tph, are far outweighed by the benefits enjoyed by others), what is there to complain about?

 

[AndyLandy]

It's all about cheap tickets though, I guess.

I'll be honest here. For me, it's all about the services from Hartford. It has bugged the hell out of me for many years that there's no direct link between the Weaver Valley stations and Warrington and beyond. You have to head down to Crewe and come back up again.

This proposal maintains both Liverpool and Birmingham as 1tph from Hartford, but would introduce 1tph to Preston and 1tph to Euston as well. Add on the fact that the overall service patterns would mean 2tph to Crewe and suddenly Hartford offers everything I could ever ask of it.

Of course, if you're not travelling to/from the Weaver Valley, you probably don't care all that much, but that's life, I guess.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But the Birmingham to Manchester services are wedged with passengers travelling all the way through. The Liverpool to Birmingham services are generally quieter and, when busy, are mostly full of passengers travelling between Liverpool and Crewe and, especially, Stafford and Birmingham. Both flows would continue to have been served at the same frequency despite the changes. One train per hour is sufficient for through travel between Liverpool/Runcorn and Wolverhampton/Birmingham, and there would still have been two extra journey opportunities per hour for these passengers with a change at Stafford.

Does one of XC's BHM-STA(-MAN) services make a good connection with VT's hourly (EUS-)STA-LIV (and vice versa)? As you say, LM running BHM-PRE and EUS-LIV could also allow an interchange at Stafford or Crewe (or even Hartford, if you're that way inclined). So, there are still 3 services an hour between the two stations, but only one would be direct, rather than the two currently.

As a user of the BHM-LIV service (specifically, the slow one which would be diverted to Preston) I can attest that usage is usually quite low. It's only ever a single 4-car 350 in my experience and even that's excessive (It wasn't that long ago that we got two-car 158s or 170s on LIV-BHM).

If we were talking about cutting the only direct BHM-LIV train for this, I'd be far less inclined to support it, since I accept that the through journey is far more valuable.

That all said, what about making the current EUS-CRE extend to PRE? That way nothing existing is changed, and all that's added is a new CRE-PRE stopping service. That'd still allow the extra Weaver Valley services, and leave BHM-LIV as 2tph direct.

 

[Mr Spock]

Yes, an increase of just 64 Standard Class seats per service. Simply incredibly. And that's if they decide to go with 9-car Pendolinos, which is unlikely. 6-car Pendolinos would likely have 5 Standard Class carriages (same as 9-car) and just 1 First Class carriage.

Demand between Birmingham and Preston is greater than that. If we can have an increased number of services, cheaper tickets, and the only passengers to lose out are those travelling between Liverpool/Runcorn and Wolverhampton/Birmingham (whose losses, given that they only involve a reduction of 2tph to 1tph, are far outweighed by the benefits enjoyed by others), what is there to complain about?

Not sure where the demand for Birmingham-Preston is coming from as the hourly Voyagers I get on are rarely (if ever) full.