More Virgin services Birmingham-Scotland

[swt_passenger]

This is interesting...

These service extensions are mentioned in the ORR's refusal letter for the Blackpool and Shrewsbury proposals.

It considers other timetable changes from December 2013 that will combine some Birmingham-Scotland trains with Euston-Wolverhampton services. These are subject to a separate application which has not yet been submitted to ORR. This will reduce the number of services on the busy multi-user route between Birmingham and Wolverhampton by one per hour each way and provide some additional resilience through some extended scheduled dwell times at Birmingham and Wolverhampton.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

This is interesting...
These service extensions are mentioned in the ORR's refusal letter for the Blackpool and Shrewsbury proposals.

And this bit (also for Dec 2013):

additional calls at Crewe in Virgin’s off-peak Euston-Liverpool services

 

[Pumbaa]

Spin glorious spin. Virgin must be pretty confident it can happen if the application hasn't gone in yet.

 

[The Planner]

Joined up services were offered back as Class 9s in Dec 13 from what I can see.

 

[IrishDave]

Joined up services were offered back as Class 9s in Dec 13 from what I can see.

Well, they now appear as such on OpenTrainTimes - I don't know if the WTTs have been finalised, but something's been uploaded for December onwards.

The down Euston-Birmingham-Scotland services are headcoded 9Sxx and the returns as 9Mxx: see this list of trains calling at Sandwell and Dudley, for example.

In order that the calling pattern is symmetric, the up Scotland-Birmingham-Euston calls at MKC, not Watford, and the xx30 Birmingham-Euston now calls at Watford, not MKC. To fit that in, the up Chester now calls platform 5 at MKC, and everything else is tweaked.

Furthermore, the xx30 from Birmingham is formed off the down xx23 from Euston which terminates at New St at xx45, so there's a Pendolino sat in a platform at New St for a full 45 minutes... that's gonna be fun...

Finally, most (haven't checked them all) of the Liverpool-Euston trains call at Crewe in both directions (if for no other reason than a Crewe stop is probably better than shoving in several minutes pathing time to keep it behind the up 9Mxx that has to call at Watford Junction instead of MKC while still following the up 1Uxx Trent Valley stopper).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The Euston-West Mids-Scotland services look just like the current couple of linked through trains.
Extended waits northbound at New St and southbound at Wolverhampton.
Same departure times from Glasgow/Edinburgh/Birmingham.

 

[IrishDave]

The Euston-West Mids-Scotland services look just like the current couple of linked through trains.
Extended waits northbound at New St and southbound at Wolverhampton.
Same departure times from Glasgow/Edinburgh/Birmingham.

The only difference seems to be that the northbound leaves New St at xx15 rather than xx20 so that it can call at Sandwell and Dudley and still be in the same path north of Wolverhampton.

 

[calc7]

MKC now has a terrible Virgin Up service to London, at xx47, xx00 and xx03!

 

[tractakid]

MKC now has a terrible Virgin Up service to London, at xx47, xx00 and xx03!

the xx14 fast LM helps a little, but still, that's all 4 fast services within 27 minutes of the hour.

Thank you for pointing out this less fortunate consequence.

 

[calc7]

Additionally, this service is bizarre.

 

[All Line Rover]

Also annoying are the significantly increased dwell times on all Anglo-Scottish down services at Wolverhampton.

 

[swt_passenger]

Also annoying are the significantly increased dwell times on all Anglo-Scottish down services at Wolverhampton.

which as the ORR explained in their letter:

"provide some additional resilience through some extended scheduled dwell times at Birmingham and Wolverhampton."

 

[Eagle]

Additionally, this service is bizarre.

I have no idea what's going on there.

Although it has to be said that even with all those stops it's still doing Birmingham to London in only 1h37.

 

[All Line Rover]

which as the ORR explained in their letter:

"provide some additional resilience through some extended scheduled dwell times at Birmingham and Wolverhampton."

Perhaps so, but passengers to Birmingham are left in the odd situation that it is quicker to alight the Virgin train at Wolverhampton and board a CrossCountry service for the remaining 15 minutes of their journey.

 

[IrishDave]

Additionally, this service is bizarre.

Yes, indeed. That would normally call only at Watford, slotting between the up 1Uxx Trent Valley service and the up Liverpool.

However, the relevant up Liverpool doesn't call at Stafford (or Crewe), and so 1B62 calls at Rugby in order to slot in behind it (rather than in front). 1B62 still needs to call at Watford, but it would then be caught up by the unusually sped-up 1240 from Glasgow, which calls only at Carlisle and Preston, so 1B62 adds a stop in MK platform 5 to be overtaken by the Glasgow.

So the question becomes, why have they decided to speed up the 1240 Glasgow-Euston? I can't see anything to replace the calls at Oxenholme, Lancaster, Wigan and Warrington made by the current 1240...

1B62's call at MK also means the 1549 Euston-Birmingham has to call platform 6 (not 5) at MK and cross DF-DS at Hanslope rather than at the north end of MK - I think that may (aside from evening/weekend blocks) be the only train booked to cross at Hanslope in the down direction?

 

[tractakid]

adds a stop in MK platform 5

Hooray- a fast(ish, stops at WFJ) service appearing in the MKC void, if only for one hour. :P

 

[Blindtraveler]

Could the speeded up 12:40x Glasgow be partly for diagramming? With the extended services taking more pendos to Scotland may theres a need for a unit to get back to EUS for an evening Rushbuster? Also last time I was on that train it seamed to load well so it may be that VT have done there homework↲ and chosen this one to speed up? It certainly makes sense to have a Super Fast London at round that time for business users who dont wish to go on the fast morning services.↲

 

[Eagle]

That would make sense. Both it and the accelerated Liverpool get to Euston at about 16.50, right in time to start the evening peak service.

 

[dk1]

Could the speeded up 12:40x Glasgow be partly for diagramming? With the extended services taking more pendos to Scotland may theres a need for a unit to get back to EUS for an evening Rushbuster? Also last time I was on that train it seamed to load well so it may be that VT have done there homework↲ and chosen this one to speed up? It certainly makes sense to have a Super Fast London at round that time for business users who dont wish to go on the fast morning services.↲

Could it be that the planned Blackpool Voyager was intended to follow this train & doing the honours at Wigan/Warrington?

 

[Eagle]

Could it be that the planned Blackpool Voyager was intended to follow this train & doing the honours at Wigan/Warrington?

Probably. The afternoon train was dep Blackpool 14.03, arr London 16.54 (I don't think we ever got times of intermediate stops, but it would have been right behind the Glasgow to London train).


Would anything theoretically stop Virgin from running trains from Preston to London at the same time as the Blackpool service would have run?

 

[MCR247]

I don't see why they couldn't, assuming they had the stock and staff etc and there was a path

 

[dk1]

But isnt that the whole problem? NR will not allow them due to peformance issues.

 

[MCR247]

Oh yeah ofc, I forgot about the reason for the Blackpools being rejected

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Probably. The afternoon train was dep Blackpool 14.03, arr London 16.54 (I don't think we ever got times of intermediate stops, but it would have been right behind the Glasgow to London train).
Would anything theoretically stop Virgin from running trains from Preston to London at the same time as the Blackpool service would have run?

Virgin will put the Pendo stops back in until they get more paths.
But they were only doing what the RUS promised (running extra Prestons to enable speeded up Glasgows).

 

[dannypye9999]

if they've rejected the Blackpool and Shrewsbury service, I think the ORR need a good talking to, it seems these days its all about the interest of themselves more than the interest of the passenger. How much longer are they going to reject applications that suggest a better railway? Its time to bring back British Rail.

 

[tbtc]

This now gives Virgin/ First/ Whoever the chance to trumpet a Blackpool - London service in 2015/ 2016/ Whenever as "plugging the long afternoon gap for Wigan/ Warrington passengers" as an added bonus

 

[transmanche]

if they've rejected the Blackpool and Shrewsbury service, I think the ORR need a good talking to, it seems these days its all about the interest of themselves more than the interest of the passenger.

Eh? How does the ORR benefit by rejecting the Blackpool and Shrewsbury services? (Are you confusing the ORR with Network Rail?)

 

[dvboy]

Mentioned this in the december timetable thread the other day but the London-Birmingham-Scotland services means the loss of one train each hour each way between Birmingham and Wolverhampton.

This won't be so bad from Wolverhampton, losing the x:32 between the x:30 and x:37 trains, with a x:41 XC and the x:45 VT following, but from Birmingham this means a gap of 19 minutes between the LM stopper at x:38 and the Manchester XC at x:57 (with the exception of 17:xx where there is a 3-car 170 to Shrewsbury at 17:43).

The Manchester trains are already crowded enough in the peak with many Wolverhampton commuters despite an 11 car Pendolino just 7 minutes before, the 16:57, 17:57 and 18:57 are really going to be wedged. It'll be bad news too for Sandwell & Dudley commuters who'll have to wait 15 minutes later for the Shrewsbury service at x:05 (the 17:05 is particularly notorious for overcrowding).

Is there an opportunity, or a necessity here for perhaps LM to run an additional stopper or semi-fast to Wolverhampton in the afternoon peak at around x:45, given a path is now freed up by the loss of the Pendolino?

 

[Eagle]

Mentioned this in the december timetable thread the other day but the London-Birmingham-Scotland services means the loss of one train each hour each way between Birmingham and Wolverhampton.

Oh no, then there'll only be 9tph between the two instead of 10tph. Mass overcrowding will ensue. :P


In case you haven't noticed, any sarcasm in this post is itself tongue-in-cheek. There could be genuine ramifications of losing a service here. Although I'm not sure LM would have the necessary stock and crew (even if it's just one unit) to run a replacement service at the moment. (This may change of course when the 350/3s arrive.)

 

[dvboy]

I speak from experience as that's my commute. I already deliberately go for the VTs or LM's Liverpool trains as a second choice because of the overcrowding on the stopper, Shrewsbury and Manchester trains in the evening peak. It will get worse on those trains in the back half of the hour with the loss of the x:50s, but no doubt Virgin will spin it as extra seats on the x:15 departures, which perhaps won't be appear to be as crowded as the x:20 Voyagers currently are.