London Midland December 2013 WCML services?

[MK Tom]

I've heard some rumours that LM are introducing some new fast Northampton services in December and rejigging the Crewe ones. Can anyone substantiate or detail this for me? Is anything else of note planned? Many thanks.

 

[The Planner]

May 14....

 

[swt_passenger]

Is this because May 14 is the expected date when the relevant 7 new 350 units are available? IIRC from the track access applications for the 110 mph running it was explained that because of the lack of suitable stock, the fast Crewe services via Weedon would not be operated in the peaks until the extra stock arrived?

So that would be an obvious improvement...

 

[MK Tom]

I was under the impression there were some changes in Dec 13 regarding the Crewe fasts with more coming in May.

What about the Northampton ones? I had heard there would be a few EUS-MKC-NMP and EUS-NMP non-stop services.

 

[tractakid]

A London Midland train not stopping at MKC? Has this ever happened before?

 

[Pumbaa]

Yes prior to VHF there were peak Rugby - Euston dusty bins. Glorious sound.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Yes prior to VHF there were peak Rugby - Euston dusty bins. Glorious sound.

I have to agree entirely with this, bring m back!!!

On topic, can the /2s be modiffied for 110mph running also or is this not technically doable?

 

[The Planner]

What about the Northampton ones? I had heard there would be a few EUS-MKC-NMP and EUS-NMP non-stop services.

That is the plan, but I suspect there are a few wary people that will be thinking long and hard about offering those after the Virgin situation.

 

[swt_passenger]

I have to agree entirely with this, bring m back!!!

On topic, can the /2s be modiffied for 110mph running also or is this not technically doable?

They supposedly started with identical equipment (other than the shoe gear before the pedants mention it) and the only physical mods were within the motors, so I don't see why not.

But it's likely they just don't need to do any of the 350/2 fleet to meet the number of diagrams required. 110 mph running will only ever apply to a small subset of the overall number of services...

 

[MK Tom]

Also it was always the idea that the Crewe services would only be worked with high quality stock in terms of passenger comfort. As in tables, armrests, 2+2.

Have LM not put in an application for those Northampton services yet then? Seeing as Virgin did their ones ages ago. It seems far less likely to get blocked as it's just a rejigging of existing services and not a set of completely new routes.

 

[bILLOO]

I thought this was due to start in Dec 2014? Two morning non-stoppers from Northampton to London in the morning peak?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

They supposedly started with identical equipment (other than the shoe gear before the pedants mention it) and the only physical mods were within the motors, so I don't see why not.

But it's likely they just don't need to do any of the 350/2 fleet to meet the number of diagrams required. 110 mph running will only ever apply to a small subset of the overall number of services...

The planning for more peak services is probably based on 8/12-car working at 110mph, but this is not yet approved by NR.

 

[The Planner]

Have LM not put in an application for those Northampton services yet then? Seeing as Virgin did their ones ages ago. It seems far less likely to get blocked as it's just a rejigging of existing services and not a set of completely new routes.

I was under the assumption it required fast line running that isn't now, therefore I bet Virgin will be watching the situation closely.

 

[swt_passenger]

The planning for more peak services is probably based on 8/12-car working at 110mph, but this is not yet approved by NR.

What I'm getting at is that it only ever needs a certain proportion of the overall 350 fleet to be converted, 110 mph running will not apply to local routes around Birmingham, or routes such as Liverpool - New St, or New St to Coventry, or all the southern WCML stoppers such as the Tring services.

 

[D1009]

What I'm getting at is that it only ever needs a certain proportion of the overall 350 fleet to be converted, 110 mph running will not apply to local routes around Birmingham, or routes such as Liverpool - New St, or New St to Coventry, or all the southern WCML stoppers such as the Tring services.

I'm sure it would improve performance if the Liverpool Brums could run at 110, particularly those that run fast line between Crewe and Stafford, also those that don't call at Penkridge, and poor performance is what the whole pathing debate is supposed to be about.

 

[Boothby97]

Also it was always the idea that the Crewe services would only be worked with high quality stock in terms of passenger comfort. As in tables, armrests, 2+2.

Have LM not put in an application for those Northampton services yet then? Seeing as Virgin did their ones ages ago. It seems far less likely to get blocked as it's just a rejigging of existing services and not a set of completely new routes.

Well there are at least two 350/2s on Crewe-Euston services today. In three hours at Nuneaton (so far) I've noted 350255 going to Euston and 350235 going to Crewe.

 

[The Planner]

Slow lines between Crewe and Stafford go up to 100mph from early next year. The poor performance bit applies south of Rugby in the main.

 

[swt_passenger]

Have LM not put in an application for those Northampton services yet then? Seeing as Virgin did their ones ages ago. It seems far less likely to get blocked as it's just a rejigging of existing services and not a set of completely new routes.

It seems to me that the original 110 mph application already included the peak services as well as off-peak, and the ORR decision letter already includes a 'minded to allow' for the peak services, pending stock availability:

13. Our assessment is that the criteria set out in our 15 December 2011 letter have now been met in respect of the December 2012 services. It should be emphasised that our “minded to” decision of 15 December 2011 still stands in respect of the rights intended to commence in May 2014. We remain prepared to approve these rights in a separate supplemental agreement as soon as the remaining criterion has been met.

http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/s22-lbr-30sa-decision-letter.pdf

So it shouldn't cause a major debate when the supplementary TAA actually goes in?

 

[DarloRich]

ooh ooh ooh ooh ooh might we finally get the promised MKC servcies direct form the Marston Vale Line?

What is that i see? A pig? Flying? A flying pig?

 

[MK Tom]

ooh ooh ooh ooh ooh might we finally get the promised MKC servcies direct form the Marston Vale Line?

What is that i see? A pig? Flying? A flying pig?

That's been due to start in May 2014 since about 2011. Prior to that it was due to start in about a year for about ten years.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I'm sure it would improve performance if the Liverpool Brums could run at 110, particularly those that run fast line between Crewe and Stafford, also those that don't call at Penkridge, and poor performance is what the whole pathing debate is supposed to be about.

The 350/1s already do 110mph on the Liverpool run where appropriate (Bushbury-Stafford, and fast lines north of Stafford).
They are just not timed at 110, given the unpredictability of which type will run any particular service.
I bet they will all be turned slow line when the line speed is raised to 100mph Stafford-Crewe.

 

[The Planner]

Doubt it will be all, still plenty of freight getting in the way. The speed increase is primarily to deal with engineering blocks for Norton Bridge.

 

[DarloRich]

That's been due to start in May 2014 since about 2011. Prior to that it was due to start in about a year for about ten years.

It has been due to start since MKC opened in 1982!

 

[tbtc]

ooh ooh ooh ooh ooh might we finally get the promised MKC servcies direct form the Marston Vale Line?

What is that i see? A pig? Flying? A flying pig?

Would that require an extra DMU, or is there enough slack at the moment to allow a unit to run up from Bletchley to Milton Keynes and back each hour?

 

[DarloRich]

Would that require an extra DMU, or is there enough slack at the moment to allow a unit to run up from Bletchley to Milton Keynes and back each hour?

The timetable would need to change but i think there is enough slack in the two unit operation to make it work. The will and inclination has to be there from all sides however........

 

[sd0733]

The 350/1s already do 110mph on the Liverpool run where appropriate (Bushbury-Stafford, and fast lines north of Stafford).
They are just not timed at 110, given the unpredictability of which type will run any particular service.
I bet they will all be turned slow line when the line speed is raised to 100mph Stafford-Crewe.

Most Brum-liverpools are only permitted at 100mph even with a 350/1 as the majority of new street drivers have never had the required brief/training to drive the route at 110. All crewe drivers have due to trent work so if its a crewe driver they can do 110.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

A London Midland train not stopping at MKC? Has this ever happened before?

Once by accident when a fast off peak Northampton failed to call ...(in Silverlink days...)

 

[D1009]

Most Brum-liverpools are only permitted at 100mph even with a 350/1 as the majority of new street drivers have never had the required brief/training to drive the route at 110. All crewe drivers have due to trent work so if its a crewe driver they can do 110.

Why do they need special training to drive at 110?

 

[MK Tom]

Once by accident when a fast off peak Northampton failed to call ...(in Silverlink days...)

Silverlink did stuff like this a few times. Services calling at Wolverton when they weren't meant to is something I experienced.

A third unit might be needed for MKC to allow a decent turn-around time, but the units do currently spend about 15 minutes at Bletchley and about 10 at Bedford so probably not.

 

[sd0733]

Why do they need special training to drive at 110?

I asked one the other day and he said that they have 1 trip in each direction with an instructor to take into account the different stopping distances at the increased speed and they also have to read and sign a brief.
Basically its just a case of backside covering.