GA franchise extension

[Tom C]

It could possibly run up to Kings Lynn, providing that branch with a second train per hour and allowing local journeys along the whole route. Not sure what school traffic there is, but there may be off peak shopping/student/tourist type demand into Cambridge, as well as to the airport.

The issue is the lengthy single line section between Littleport and Downham Market. Once a train enters the single line its around 8 minutes to clear it so 4 TPH across it along with the freight traffic for Middleton Towers mixed in would make it very tight.

Eg there's now peak hours 8 car services (limited stops, due to platform lengths) through to Ely and I think even Kings Lynn.

There has been an 8 car 365 to and from Kings Lynn for some time. 8 go up in the morning calling at Downham Market, Ely and Cambridge with a 4 car calling at all stations which marry up at Cambridge and in the evening there is a 12 car to Cambridge with 8 going forward to Ely, Downham Market and Lynn.

There is also a problem with stabling space at Kings Lynn. At the moment, both platforms are filled with stock overnight, the carriage road has the 8 car 365 and the old South Lynn platform has a Anglia 317 for 1st morning service to Liverpool Street.

 

[dk1]

Im of the opinion that Chiltern getting 170s from TPx was the plan all along. Like for like TPx have ended up with more vehicles thanks to the 350s. All part of the bigger scheme when the franchises across the north are merged once again & the fact that chiltern had little chance of ordering new diesel stock.

 

[northwichcat]

Im of the opinion that Chiltern getting 170s from TPx was the plan all along. Like for like TPx have ended up with more vehicles thanks to the 350s. All part of the bigger scheme when the franchises across the north are merged once again & the fact that chiltern had little chance of ordering new diesel stock.

Glad to see the word 'opinion' in that post. The facts are:
* TPE were due to get 40 additional carriages in CP4 in the form of new DMUs but due to new electrification plans that changed to 40 additional carriages in the form of EMUs. If it was the plan to cascade the 170/3s away then it would have been shown as 22 additional carriages on the HLOS.
* The 185s and 170/3s have never been a large enough fleet to cover the Scottish services, as well as the other TPE services without severe overcrowding.
* As a result of the 350/4s being introduced TPE have proceeded with the plan for 5tph on North TPE as per the Network Rail RUS. The extra services start in a couple of weeks time. Without the 170/3s TPE's new timetable won't work.
* The HLOS for CP5 has 6tph on North TPE starting in December 2016 - the same time as 185s should be freed up from Blackpool services and the Ordsall Chord should open.
* North TPE services should start moving over to electric in December 2018.

The above means TPE should have kept the 170/3s until December 2018. Minister Stephen Hammond has confirmed that TPE will get replacement stock for the 170/3s but hasn't confirmed what.

Chiltern were understood to be looking at using more loco-hauled stock but decided to approach Porterbrook for the 170/3s because it'll be cheaper to lease and operate the 170/3s.

Also Patrick McLoughlin has confirmed that TPE will remain as a separate franchise with the DfT franchise review idea of the routes moving to Northern, EC/XC and EMT not going ahead.

I'm of the opinion had Chiltern not taken the 170/3s then they would have gone to Northern and be supplemented with more 170s (e.g. the LO 172s could go to LM and LM could give up some 2 car 170s.) The reason for this is Network Rail long term rolling stock strategy RUS has identified North West routes that won't be getting electrified as suitable routes to cascade 'type 2' regional DMUs down to, while their proposed platform lengthening plans would allow for 4 car 170s at some stations where only a Northern service operate (156s and 158s have slightly shorter carriages to 170s, 175s and 185s.)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Problem is the 170s on Anglia are used for over 75mph running and timed as such.

Between Norwich and Cambridge and between Ipswich and Haughley Jn / Norwich.

156s will result a journey time penalty with a mximum speed of 75mph, never mind a lowering in journey quality.

If slower rolling stock may be used then the service needs to be re-timed to make allowances for that. If Northern could manage to timetable a peak time Crewe-Manchester service to be 2 x 142s instead of a 323 despite how busy that section of the WCML is then I'm sure Anglia could manage it, if needed, as well.

A 156 would provide around 30 more seats than a 170, so if it's a busy service would it really be a lowering in journey quality?

 

[evergreenadam]

Early and late trains would be more useful than middle of the day ones given that one could change at Bishops Stortford.

North of Cambridge there is a limit on the number of electric trains allowed. the further you go the more units there are likely to be in section. (I believe the current limit is five units moving).

And the King's Lynn branch is to receive a half hourly frequency by extending a second non-stop King's Cross to Cambridge service each hour to King's Lynn once the power has been upgraded and Ely North junction improved. Planned for the new franchise. Splitting and joining at Cambridge likely to continue though.

 

[jopsuk]

Splitting at Cambridge will continue to be essential due to short platforms at Waterbeach, Littleport and Watlington- though there are plans to resite the station Waterbeach when the barracks housing project goes ahead. This, as far as I know, involves longer platforms (peak trains into Cambridge get very crowded already by Waterbeach)- could splitting/joining operations comfortably take place at Ely? Even if FCC/TLGN Franchise lose the 321s and 317s I would think that with the 700s they end up with more 365s than are needed for the current services.

 

[Class 170101]

Returning Ipswich to Cambridges to 156s won't go down well as they are seen as older trains as where as the 170s were seem as new trains.

You also add about 3 minutes each way to the journey time, whilst not a lot it improves performance, connection margins and turnaround times at Cambridge and Ipswich.

 

[dk1]

The 16.44 Cambridge to Ipswich is now full & standing with a 3-car 170 diagrammed daily such is the growth on this route.

 

[jopsuk]

I reckon you could get a lot more growth on the route if the trains were more frequent- especially with stations at Fulbourn and Six Mile Bottom (the latter as a Parkway)

 

[dk1]

I reckon you could get a lot more growth on the route if the trains were more frequent- especially with stations at Fulbourn and Six Mile Bottom (the latter as a Parkway)

Cherry Hinton has long been the most obvious choice but is in the long single line section from Dullingham to Coldham lane Jn & would require £millions spent on track & signalling let alone the building of the station to maintain an hourly frequency as turnarounds/passing points just dont match up.

 

[CockneySparrow]

No, no spare diesel traction available. Will be emus to/from Cambridge.

Norwich to Lowestoft will go hourly on Summer Sundays only from 2015.

Norwich to Sheringham will continue the successful hourly service that has run on Summer Sundays for the last 10 or so years to be 'year round'.

It might be a good idea to run some of the LST terminators at Cambridge through to Ely especially with the new station being built at the Science Park coupled with spare stock/times from the crossrail debacle and the fact more carriages are needed between Ely & CBG

The NRW service to CBG can terminate at Ely then go back, should or could free up a 170

 

[lemonic]

It might be a good idea to run some of the LST terminators at Cambridge through to Ely especially with the new station being built at the Science Park coupled with spare stock/times from the crossrail debacle and the fact more carriages are needed between Ely & CBG

The NRW service to CBG can terminate at Ely then go back, should or could free up a 170

There is no way that the Norwich-Cambridge service will change to run Norwich-Ely. Its huge success since introduction by Anglia Railways has been due to the fact that it is a direct train Norwich-Cambridge.

 

[306024]

The 16.44 Cambridge to Ipswich is now full & standing with a 3-car 170 diagrammed daily such is the growth on this route.

And from the May 14 timetable change many more Ipswich - Cambridge services become 3 cars at the expense of the Peterborough service which reduce to 2 car 170s.

 

[chubs]

Returning Ipswich to Cambridges to 156s won't go down well as they are seen as older trains as where as the 170s were seem as new trains.

They forced it through on EMT's Norwich to Liverpool services admittedly 170 to 158 but still.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And from the May 14 timetable change many more Ipswich - Cambridge services become 3 cars at the expense of the Peterborough service which reduce to 2 car 170s.

Are all Cambridge-Norwich services now 3 car as well?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

There is no way that the Norwich-Cambridge service will change to run Norwich-Ely. Its huge success since introduction by Anglia Railways has been due to the fact that it is a direct train Norwich-Cambridge.

Lots of people travel all the way to Cambridge, stopping at Ely will be a terrible idea.

 

[oliMw]

The NRW service to CBG can terminate at Ely then go back, should or could free up a 170

The Norwich - Cambridge route is highly successful and making it Norwich - Ely would be disliked at both ends of the line

 

[CockneySparrow]

There is no way that the Norwich-Cambridge service will change to run Norwich-Ely. Its huge success since introduction by Anglia Railways has been due to the fact that it is a direct train Norwich-Cambridge.

Your probably right that it will never happen but it should!

I dont think in the long term it will stop or deter people travelling on the service as people who need to travel will still do so especially if both trains are timed to be waiting for the other one to come in to say platform 3 so its a quick off one train down platform 3 onto the next one and off we go

Remember that there will only be a small % travelling direct anyway

 

[306024]

Your probably right that it will never happen but it should!

I dont think in the long term it will stop or deter people travelling on the service as people who need to travel will still do so especially if both trains are timed to be waiting for the other one to come in to say platform 3 so its a quick off one train down platform 3 onto the next one and off we go

Remember that there will only be a small % travelling direct anyway

Hmm I think you are in a minority of one suggesting this, and while I respect your opinion, I'm not so sure about your diagramming

In the light of subsequent posts I may have been too polite !

 

[oliMw]

Your probably right that it will never happen but it should!

I dont think in the long term it will stop or deter people travelling on the service as people who need to travel will still do so especially if both trains are timed to be waiting for the other one to come in to say platform 3 so its a quick off one train down platform 3 onto the next one and off we go

Remember that there will only be a small % travelling direct anyway

Changing trains can be a bit of a deterrent to some people, however easy, because changing trains can be seen by some people as difficult and may cause some people to not travel or just drive

 

[CockneySparrow]

And the King's Lynn branch is to receive a half hourly frequency by extending a second non-stop King's Cross to Cambridge service each hour to King's Lynn once the power has been upgraded and Ely North junction improved. Planned for the new franchise. Splitting and joining at Cambridge likely to continue though.

Is that rumour or fact, reason I ask is that for one there aren't enough passengers to warrant the hourly service let alone running a second service per hour between 8am and 4pm

Second it will be tight on the single sections bear in mind you will be having 6 trains some hours doing a 12 minute journey between Littleport and Downham or vice versa

Suppose they could redouble it but having said that they would have to rip the existing one up along with all the masts and start from scratch then the ongoing yearly costs of propping both lines instead of one on the sinking fen land

All in all they would get better value opening a new line from Lynn to Swaffham or Hunstanton than do all that

Suppose it will give the 10 passengers on the 11:58 from Lynn the opportunity for say 5 to travel on the new 11:28

 

[dk1]

Your probably right that it will never happen but it should!

I dont think in the long term it will stop or deter people travelling on the service as people who need to travel will still do so especially if both trains are timed to be waiting for the other one to come in to say platform 3 so its a quick off one train down platform 3 onto the next one and off we go

Remember that there will only be a small % travelling direct anyway

While we are at it let's terminate the Liverpool-Norwich East Midlands service at Ely & bung them on the AGA service that will take them through to Norwich. I have never heard a more ridiculous idea & some of the postings on here over the years have taken some beating.

 

[CockneySparrow]

While we are at it let's terminate the Liverpool-Norwich East Midlands service at Ely & bung them on the AGA service that will take them through to Norwich. I have never heard a more ridiculous idea & some of the postings on here over the years have taken some beating.

There is no reason to terminate the EMT service, its not EMT who have a constant shortage of DMUs, that's the whole point GA do have a shortage of DMUs, like it or not GA need to either consider getting additional stock or look at ways of getting the best out of what they have which must include terminating the Cambridge service at Ely

On another note with passenger numbers ever increasing I dont think we can continue with the current set up of services between Ely and Cambridge, surely we have got to be looking at people getting left behind like they are on the Bedford to London route (take a look on YouTube)

 

[dk1]

There is no reason to terminate the EMT service, its not EMT who have a constant shortage of DMUs, that's the whole point GA do have a shortage of DMUs, like it or not GA need to either consider getting additional stock or look at ways of getting the best out of what they have which must include terminating the Cambridge service at Ely

Words fail me on this one so I will give up. I won't mention it to the passengers on my very well loaded Norwich to Cambridge service in the morning with whom around 70% that are on departing Brandon will still be there on arrival at Cambridge.

 

[evergreenadam]

Is that rumour or fact, reason I ask is that for one there aren't enough passengers to warrant the hourly service let alone running a second service per hour between 8am and 4pm

Second it will be tight on the single sections bear in mind you will be having 6 trains some hours doing a 12 minute journey between Littleport and Downham or vice versa

Suppose they could redouble it but having said that they would have to rip the existing one up along with all the masts and start from scratch then the ongoing yearly costs of propping both lines instead of one on the sinking fen land

All in all they would get better value opening a new line from Lynn to Swaffham or Hunstanton than do all that

Suppose it will give the 10 passengers on the 11:58 from Lynn the opportunity for say 5 to travel on the new 11:28

It is certainly happening:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...a/file/245205/consultation-responses-tsgn.pdf

4.95 There will be no changes to the existing train service requirement until
May 2017, when investment by Network Rail in improvements to Ely
North Junction should facilitate an increase in the service between King’s
Lynn and Cambridge to provide 2 trains per hour all day, Monday to
Saturday (except in those hours where existing freight train paths prevent
this).
4.96 The future of the occasional extensions to King's Lynn of Liverpool Street
to Cambridge services will be considered as part of the future of the
Greater Anglia franchise.

In relation to the latter there is no word as yet.

 

[306024]

There is no reason to terminate the EMT service, its not EMT who have a constant shortage of DMUs, that's the whole point GA do have a shortage of DMUs, like it or not GA need to either consider getting additional stock or look at ways of getting the best out of what they have which must include terminating the Cambridge service at Ely

Even if this was commercially acceptable (commercial suicide more like), how exactly do you propose to provide an hourly Norwich - Ely service with two units then? As for getting additional stock, good idea, I wonder why no one thought of that before, or perhaps just maybe they have..........

 

[oliMw]

On another note with passenger numbers ever increasing I dont think we can continue with the current set up of services between Ely and Cambridge, surely we have got to be looking at people getting left behind like they are on the Bedford to London route (take a look on YouTube)

So then a logical idea would be to remove one of the hourly services from Cambridge to Ely, that makes sense :roll:

 

[TheBigD]

I reckon you could get a lot more growth on the route if the trains were more frequent- especially with stations at Fulbourn and Six Mile Bottom (the latter as a Parkway)

You could, if you had the rolling stock, run an addition peak service arriving in to Cambridge at 0840ish and departing Cambridge at 1705ish by utilising the existing passing loop at Dullingham.

If you want to open new stations then you would need to reconfigure the service so that all trains passed at Dullingham to give more time between there and Cambridge. You'd also need to inter work the service with the East Suffolk lines trains at Ipswich or you would need an extra unit. The Ipswich-Peterbrough service would also need to be retimed.

The route has seen remarkable growth since it gained an hourly service. If you go back to the mid/late 1990's there was a gap of nearly 3 hours in between services at one point during the day. And most of those were single car 153's.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And from the May 14 timetable change many more Ipswich - Cambridge services become 3 cars at the expense of the Peterborough service which reduce to 2 car 170s.

Should have happened years ago. 3 car 170's are wasted on the Ipswich-Peterborough route. 2 car 170's will be a much better match of capacity. I observe these at the Peterborough end almost everyday and a 153 could cope comfortable most of the time.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Are all Cambridge-Norwich services now 3 car as well?

Yes they are except the SX 1940 ex Norwich and 2115 ex Cambridge which are booked a 2 car 170 unless the diagrams have changed recently.

 

[CockneySparrow]

So then a logical idea would be to remove one of the hourly services from Cambridge to Ely, that makes sense :roll:

No that's not what I said, yes you remove the three or even two car DMU but this is replaced with an 8 car 317 or 379 to LST so you will have gained 5 coaches between Ely and Cambridge and also gained a rural DMU in the bargain

 

[Tomnick]

A very quick look suggests that the Norwich - Cambidge services are generally timed for 58 or 59 minutes between Norwich and Ely, and 61 or 62 between Ely and Norwich. Perhaps CockneySparrow could, as 306024 has already suggested, explain how you could run an hourly service over that section with two units?

 

[TheBigD]

No that's not what I said, yes you remove the three or even two car DMU but this is replaced with an 8 car 317 or 379 to LST so you will have gained 5 coaches between Ely and Cambridge and also gained a rural DMU in the bargain

But as everyone has pointed out, you don't save a DMU, you just commit commercial suicide by losing a direct link from Norwich and the Brecklands to the region's economic centre at Cambridge...

 

[43074]

In addition, one of the reasons the Norwich to Cambridge service has been so successful is because there was no regular direct link there before 2002, and the fact that the service has been so successful suggests that people would be put off by travelling if they had to change at Ely.

Also there is a desire to extend to Stansted Airport and to augment the service to half hourly as a result of it's success.

 

[w0033944]

In addition, one of the reasons the Norwich to Cambridge service has been so successful is because there was no regular direct link there before 2002, and the fact that the service has been so successful suggests that people would be put off by travelling if they had to change at Ely.

Indeed - a distant relative of mine commutes on this service and it's very handy to have those direct services.