Extra Virgin West Coast services rejected by NR

[The Ham]

A 15-car 221 set is 348 metres long. That can fit in:

Euston: platforms 1 (398 m), 2 (376 m) and 15 (402 m) only.
Watford Jct, MKC: none.
Rugby: platform 2 (344 m) with an overhang.
Coventry: platforms 2 and 3 (both 352 m) only.
Nuneaton: platform 2 (337 m) with an overhang.
Tamworth, Lichfield TV, Stafford: none.
Crewe: platforms 6 (387 m) and 12 (424 m) only.

Also wouldn't a train of that length also require more pathing space than the existing shorter train (especially as stopping at some of the platforms would likely require a slower and more careful approach than currently)?

 

[The Planner]

In a word, no, you would probably extend the dwells though.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Tonight's Shropshire star reports virgin in talks with NR about paths via Stafford for may 14

 

[Old Hill Bank]

Tonight's Shropshire star reports virgin in talks with NR about paths via Stafford for may 14

That is what got rejected, dont you just love the media!:roll:

 

[Eagle]

No, it was paths for December 2013 that were rejected. This is a new application for May 2014.

 

[Old Hill Bank]

No, it was paths for December 2013 that were rejected. This is a new application for May 2014.

So where do the new paths come from in May?

 

[MCR247]

The paths were there, that wasn't the problem.

 

[Stats]

The paths were there, that wasn't the problem.

Not all of them. Particularly on Saturdays.

Extensive analysis of Virgin Trains’ recent application for new passenger services on the WCML showed that there is not currently sufficient space on the line to run all of the additional services. The proposals would have also caused further deterioration in punctuality by adding traffic to what is already a very busy route, on which Network Rail is currently not meeting the punctuality targets it has been funded to deliver. The proposals would have a detrimental impact on the journeys of millions of passengers travelling on the route.

http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.11219

 

[The Planner]

If performance picks up, watch them work in May 14....

 

[Old Hill Bank]

Let us all hope that they are all well filled ten car jobs.
The last thing the WCML needs is fresh air taking up paths

 

[Eagle]

It'll be less likely to be fresh air if they're five-car services, obviously.

 

[Tony2215]

does this mean in the new timetable from december we are going to see pendolinos at Edinburgh?

 

[Eagle]

Yes.

But there are already Pendolinos at Edinburgh, once or twice a day. It's just now that they'll be a more frequent sight. And of course the TPE 350s will start to appear too.

 

[WatcherZero]

Virgin are banking on NR WCML performance to have improved enough over the next 6 months that their application will be accepted this time, there was only minor issues with the paths other than saturdays.

I think however that ORR will stick to its guns again and keep its policy of no new paths until the recast, unless the Government has privately signalled to Virgin that they will lean on ORR this time, the Government did lose a lot of face trumpeting the new routes and they were the original instigators asking Virgin to pursue them.

 

[SprinterMan]

Is there any reason why the Liverpool services didn't call additionally at Nuneaton instead of Crewe? Another Crewe call isn't needed and it would do wonders for Nuneaton's service pattern. It is still before Rugby so the pathing should still work.

Adam

 

[Eagle]

Is there any reason why the Liverpool services didn't call additionally at Nuneaton instead of Crewe?

Pathing reasons, due to the Birmingham–Scotland service being moved right in front of it. Crewe is the only place where that happens (obviously because that's the only place the routes overlap), so it has to be held at Crewe.

 

[SprinterMan]

Pathing reasons, due to the Birmingham–Scotland service being moved right in front of it. Crewe is the only place where that happens (obviously because that's the only place the routes overlap), so it has to be held at Crewe.

Oh ok, thanks very much

Adam

 

[Eagle]

Also another thing I've just thought of: if you stopped the Liverpool trains at Nuneaton then they'd get awfully close to the Chester/Holyhead trains immediately behind them. (They're currently 5½ minutes apart at Nuneaton.)

 

[SprinterMan]

Also another thing I've just thought of: if you stopped the Liverpool trains at Nuneaton then they'd get awfully close to the Chester/Holyhead trains immediately behind them. (They're currently 5½ minutes apart at Nuneaton.)

If the Liverpool trains omitted Crewe then this wouldn't be a problem. I have had a look on OTT and the Liverpool and EUS-BHM-GLC/EDB trains don't seem to be anywhere near each other. Now I am confused.

Adam

 

[kieron]

Also another thing I've just thought of: if you stopped the Liverpool trains at Nuneaton then they'd get awfully close to the Chester/Holyhead trains immediately behind them. (They're currently 5½ minutes apart at Nuneaton.)

I've looked at Monday on realtimetrains, and it gives a gap of 9 minutes at Nuneaton, 6 at Norton Bridge. I've no idea how close they'd need to be to cause problems, though.

I do think the idea of stopping the Liverpool trains at Crewe is a bit odd, though, as the southbound train from Liverpool currently overtakes the slower London Midland Liverpool-Birmingham train there. There are other platforms they could use, but having both trains stop there seems a bit awkward and pointless to me.

 

[The Planner]

A stop at Nuneaton will knacker it for 4 minutes on a line with a 3 minute headway, the following train is going to get knocked.

 

[WatcherZero]

NR's reply to Virgins second application putting the new services back from December 13 to May 2014 'No, perhaps Autumn'.

 

[SprinterMan]

NR's reply to Virgins second application putting the new services back from December 13 to May 2014 'No, perhaps Autumn'.

That is disappointing, but not unexpected. Looks like Shrewsbury will have to wait until the next franchise. It is a shame, there is too much red tape these days.

Adam

 

[MCR247]

Red tape? Surely its simply common sense that it isn't a good idea to cram even more trains on to a poor performing line?

 

[SprinterMan]

Red tape? Surely its simply common sense that it isn't a good idea to cram even more trains on to a poor performing line?

Good point actually, just seems a bit of a shame, that's all.

Adam

 

[bt777]

Rail commuters hoping for a direct link from Shropshire to London may be able to jump aboard in a north Shropshire town if the line gets approval, councillors have said.

Members of Wem Town Council said plans put forward by Virgin Trains to reinstate a direct rail link between the county and London could see the route travel through Wem.

Councillor Edward Towers said he has held a meeting with a representative from Virgin Trains who indicated the train could stop in Wem if the town’s station is suitable.

Councillor Towers said: “A Virgin Trains rep has indicated they are looking at starting a service from Crewe via Shrewsbury and possibly calling at Whitchurch and Nantwich.

“I asked about Wem. Wem is an area that interests them but it would only be possible if our train station could cope with five carriage trains and they are looking to see if councils will help with the expense if changes need to be made.

“It has been recommended Wem is included. I would support this subject to cost. But I think we should raise the issue that Wem is seriously keen to be part of this.”

To sign the petition, click here
See www.shropshirestar.com/rail
Bosses at Virgin Trains hope to get the direct link up and running by May next year, after the operator’s hopes of restarting the service this December were vetoed by Network Rail and the Office of Rail Regulation.

Shropshire has been without a direct rail link to London since 2011, when the Wrexham & Shropshire service to London Marylebone ended.

Travellers wanting to go to London from the county currently have to change at either Birmingham New Street, Wolverhampton or Crewe.

Members of Wem Town Council, who met in Edinburgh House last night, were unclear whether the town’s train station could cope with a five carriage train of whether it was restricted to trains with only four carriages.

Councillor Paul Johnson said: “I think it is an excellent idea if the train can stop in Wem but we have to look at the possibility of increasing the platform length.

“I think any town would love to be a part of this. It’s just how much it would cost and where the money would come from.”

More than 2,500 people have now signed a petition started by the Shropshire Star calling for the direct link to be reinstated.

Councillor Chris Mellings said the most important thing is that Shropshire gets the service.

He said: “A direct link will be great for the county. Even if it does not stop in Wem it will still benefit Shropshire.”

Members agreed to write to rail bosses confirming they would like Wem to be included in any talks regarding the route.

http://www.shropshirestar.com/news/2013/08/30/wem-has-hopes-of-being-a-direct-london-rail-link-stop/

 

[Proud Salopian]

Wem.

Wem??



Why not stop also at Yorton while they're at it?

Imagine "Wem" being on the display boards at Euston...

Oh dear.

 

[Eagle]

Was Wem a calling point on Wales and West's legendary Manchester to London Waterloo service?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Of those 3 stations, a 5-car 221 will only fit in the Down (northbound) platform at Whitchurch.
According to the Sectional Appendix, platform lengths are (Down/Up - metres):
Wem 78/87
Whitchurch 144/86
Nantwich 118/105
But there's always selective door opening.

Is Virgin looking at attaching/dividing with a Chester service at Crewe for this, or is it starting at Crewe and running via Shrewsbury and Telford with these stops on the way?
Not sure it's a serious prospect.

 

[Eagle]

I'd guess it's Shrewsbury–Crewe–London (certainly more sensible than Shrewsbury–Telford–Stafford–London would have been).