Northern and TPE Consultation Document

[northwichcat]

Selby-Hull subject to the wires going up - didn't know about the Hope valley - just certain sections or the whole line?

I think Hope Valley is such that a 185 can do Stockport-Sheffield in a comparable timing to a 158 but it has to run slower on certain sections.

If the South TPE change proposed goes ahead then there could be 185s doing Liverpool-Sheffield-Doncaster-Hull even if Selby-Hull is electrified. I also imagine TPE will want to retain a sufficient number of DMUs to allow for Sunday/overnight North TPE services to be diverted on to non-electrified lines, which could result in some regular class 185 use on North TPE.

One thing if TPE run a half-hourly Liverpool-Sheffield service using 185s then it will be a consistent level of service with regards to provision of first class and catering facilities.

 

[158722]

I think Hope Valley is such that a 185 can do Stockport-Sheffield in a comparable timing to a 158 but it has to run slower on certain sections.

If the South TPE change proposed goes ahead then there could be 185s doing Liverpool-Sheffield-Doncaster-Hull even if Selby-Hull is electrified. I also imagine TPE will want to retain a sufficient number of DMUs to allow for Sunday/overnight North TPE services to be diverted on to non-electrified lines, which could result in some regular class 185 use on North TPE.

One thing if TPE run a half-hourly Liverpool-Sheffield service using 185s then it will be a consistent level of service with regards to provision of first class and catering facilities.

I'd assumed (perhaps wrongly) that Doncaster-Hull would be via Goole and not Selby.

I maybe missed it, but was any timescale put on these proposed changes? From this discussion, it looks like the only way there is going to be enough 185s available is if the changes are dependent on the wires between Manchester-Leeds-York to allow the North TPE core to (largely) go over to EMUs. We're talking 2018 for that?

 

[northwichcat]

I'd assumed (perhaps wrongly) that Doncaster-Hull would be via Goole and not Selby.

It probably would be (except during engineering works) but where exactly are the restrictions on 185 speeds as it would still have to do Gilberdyke to Hull.

I maybe missed it, but was any timescale put on these proposed changes? From this discussion, it looks like the only way there is going to be enough 185s available is if the changes are dependent on the wires between Manchester-Leeds-York to allow the North TPE core to (largely) go over to EMUs. We're talking 2018 for that?

There's no timings given. With Central all the routes moved on the franchise end date but with the current TPE & Northern franchises routes have changed since the franchise start date.

December 2018 is the scheduled date for wires to be available for Manchester-York services.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Would the changes envisaged for the Cleethorpes area have any detrimental effect on the "day-tripper" trade that relies on rail ?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Don't forget that the 185s freed up off Manchester Airport-Blackpool will be needed to introduce 6tph on North TPE (expected December 2016)

I doubt if 6tph is going to happen (it's a consultation question).
But TPE are surely going for longer trains with 4/5tph (at least after electrification)?

I see Rail North has finally broken cover on the subject:
http://www.railnorth.org/news/help-shape-rail-services-in-the-north-of-england/
Nothing so much as an opinion though.

Edit:
The future TPE diesel routes won't be enough to employ all the 185 fleet.
I could see Northern taking over the transferred diesel routes with 185s still operating, and using other 185s on its "Northern Express" routes.
TPE will surely get a new electric fleet, while Northern will get cascades - but the cascades might include 185s.

 

[IanXC]

If that's the case I would have thought it would say Scunthope-Doncaster would be transferred to Northern.

Scunthorpe-Doncaster is already with Northern? The consultation says:

5.9 ....
 Transfer of the Doncaster-Cleethorpes section of the TPE
service to Northern.

5.13 We are therefore examining the option, subject to operational constraints, of terminating the TPE service from Manchester at Doncaster with a replacement Sheffield-Cleethorpes service being operated by Northern, possibly as an extension of the existing hourly Northern Sheffield-Scunthorpe service.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Would the changes envisaged for the Cleethorpes area have any detrimental effect on the "day-tripper" trade that relies on rail ?

I think it would indeed - if we recall the uproar during the Hatfield landslip I think its apparent that there will be a large number of people in Cleethorpes who'll (when they find out!) be very vocal about maintaining a link at least as far as Sheffield - and an 'express' one at that. Think of holiday makes on the all stops Sheffield-Cleethorpes, you just wouldn't would you!

I'm not certain of the numbers but I do wonder whether this change; the proposed transfer of 1tph Doncaster-Hull to TPE, and the idea of terminating the Cleethorpes at Doncaster is all about trying to remove the number of crossing moves at Doncaster, and the 'overcapacity' on express services between Doncaster and Sheffield.

 

[northwichcat]

I doubt if 6tph is going to happen (it's a consultation question).
But TPE are surely going for longer trains with 4/5tph (at least after electrification)?

Network Rail's business case for North TPE electrification was based on 6tph on North TPE. If DfT then come along and sanction lower service frequencies on lines where electrification has been approved then they could give weaker business cases for future electrification programs.

From the wording it suggests a second hourly Newcastle service would be the 6th train per hour but it may only run as far as York if the operator doesn't deem that that's enough demand for a second Newcastle service.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Edit:
The future TPE diesel routes won't be enough to employ all the 185 fleet.
I could see Northern taking over the transferred diesel routes with 185s still operating, and using other 185s on its "Northern Express" routes.
TPE will surely get a new electric fleet, while Northern will get cascades - but the cascades might include 185s.

If you assume South TPE becomes Liverpool-Doncaster-Hull and Liverpool-Nottingham and Middlesbrough-York and Barrow-Preston becoming shuttle services then you could get up to 40 DMUs required if you assume mainly 6 car operation on South TPE. Then if you allow for Hull-Manchester possibly not being electrified and some token services between Barrow/Middlesbrough and Manchester then you pretty much would use the entire 185 fleet. Although you would obviously free up some Northern and EMT 158s in the process to move to other routes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Scunthorpe-Doncaster is already with Northern? The consultation says:

I meant to say Scunthorpe to Cleethorpes if the intention is to tag it on to an existing service rather than Northern running 2tph between Doncaster and Scunthorpe.

 

[Mark_H]

Scunthorpe-Doncaster is already with Northern? The consultation says:

Yes, as part of Northern's Sheffield to Scunthorpe. Something that is unclear is that Northern DON-SCU already takes 15mins longer than the TPE equivilent due to 4-5 minor station stops, so they'll either need to drop those stops (making some small villages very unhappy) or add 15mins each way into the schedule, which presumably costs extra stock.

An extra 15mins may also tip the balance for people going south from Cleethorpes/Grimsby deciding whether to go via Doncaster or take EMT via Newark. At the moment the journey times are very similar but that extra 15mins will take it over the 3hr mark. I usually take TPE at the moment because the 185s are manifestly nicer than EMTs 153s, but if the 185s go elsewhere and there's a clear time saving then EMT will probably see more of my cash.

I think it would indeed - if we recall the uproar during the Hatfield landslip I think its apparent that there will be a large number of people in Cleethorpes who'll (when they find out!) be very vocal about maintaining a link at least as far as Sheffield - and an 'express' one at that. Think of holiday makes on the all stops Sheffield-Cleethorpes, you just wouldn't would you!

I'm not certain of the numbers but I do wonder whether this change; the proposed transfer of 1tph Doncaster-Hull to TPE, and the idea of terminating the Cleethorpes at Doncaster is all about trying to remove the number of crossing moves at Doncaster, and the 'overcapacity' on express services between Doncaster and Sheffield.

Good point, the landslip was definitely at "uproar" status for the local media, and the fine merchants of Cleethorpes aren't shy about raising a stink.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'd suspect Liverpool-Nottingham will switch to 185s and some of the EMT Sprinters will transfer to Northern.

I have a bad feeling that you are right.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Network Rail's business case for North TPE electrification was based on 6tph on North TPE. If DfT then come along and sanction lower service frequencies on lines where electrification has been approved then they could give weaker business cases for future electrification programs.

I should think the RUS is in the bin now, except for "illustrative options".
Frequent 2/3-car trains (when that was all that was practically available) are out, because the operational costs are too high.

 

[LowLevel]

If we're ever to get an efficient, modern rail industry, the relics of the past need to go.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hereford/worcs/6194277.stm
http://www.leicestershirevillages.com/barrowuponsoar/see-more-photos-of-the-barrow-tr,325921.html

Because things like this never happen. It's one thing with a freight train (though still not great) but I hope you never find yourself on a passenger train with your driver potentially dead in the cab and no way for you to get in - your train by the way is running without a non safety critical ticket examiner as your operator has paid the fine following staff sickness, enjoy. It's dark as well so I'm sure you know exactly where you are. That's what Mr McNulty envisages as an acceptable risk across the country in the future.

All singing all dancing safety systems still don't stop evil scrotes from dropping large chunks of brickwork off bridges or incompetent vehicle operators from knocking a massive obstruction across the line with no time to do anything about it.

If you're lucky once the DSD alarm goes off you might only have to wait 15 or 20 minutes for someone to arrive and investigate while you're sitting on the train in silence knowing only that you've come to a stand.

The fact your driver might have bled to death in the meantime is of course merely an inconvenience.

Just to complete my point, if you look above the green sheet, you'll see a prone form being dragged out of the shattered cab on a stretcher - that was the driver, several hours later.

 

[northwichcat]

I should think the RUS is in the bin now, except for "illustrative options".
Frequent 2/3-car trains (when that was all that was practically available) are out, because the operational costs are too high.

When were frequent 2/3 car trains ever the plan? Ignoring some overnight TPE services and an odd daytime working all TPE services are now formed of 3, 4, 6 or 8 carriages. The 185s released off Manchester Airport-Blackpool would have been used to introduce the 6tph on North TPE, without the need to shorten existing services. Although, with Chiltern now taking 170s...

 

[7griffinjack]

Consultations asks whether South TPE Manchester-Stockport-Sheffield frequency should be increased to 3tph, says a new Northern rail service may be required to continue to serve Warrington after Manchester-Liverpool South TPE services diverted away from Warrington. Asks whether which South TPE service calls at Man Air and which at Liverpool should be specified or left to bidders discretion.

I thought the document said somewhere that the South TP service would go via Warrington and the north TP moving to Chat Moss? Unless I read it wrong..

 

[northwichcat]

I thought the document said somewhere that the South TP service would go via Warrington and the north TP moving to Chat Moss? Unless I read it wrong..

It mentions different options

The Newcastle service operates between Manchester and Liverpool via the Newton-Le-Willows route and the Scarborough service operates via Warrington Central. From December 2016 North TransPennine services to Liverpool will operate via the Newton-Le-Willows route.

Do you consider that the ITT should specify which services should terminate at Liverpool or Manchester Airport on the North TransPennine route, or should the choice of destination be left to bidders’ commercial decisions, and what are your reasons? What evidence do you have in relation to any of these options?
...

From December 2016 it is likely that North TransPennine services between Manchester and Liverpool will no longer operate via Warrington. However, this route will continue to be served by trains on the South TransPennine route. Depending on decisions on South TransPennine service levels and destinations, it may therefore be necessary to specify an May 2014 TPE South Route with EMT and Northern Rail Weekday and Saturday Services additional Northern service in order to maintain the current service level on the route via Warrington.

What factors do you consider should be taken into account in the assessment of the option to specify one additional train per hour on the South TransPennine route, in particular in the balance of crowding, frequency, journey time and connectivity benefits? Please provide any evidence you may
have.
...

The route between Hull and Selby is not included in current electrification plans. However, the evaluation of the case for Hull-Selby electrification is progressing and a decision is expected to be taken late 2014 or early 2015. Current demand to/from Hull is shown in Figure 4.2. This shows the main travel demand is to towns in East Yorkshire, and to Leeds and London. If the decision is taken to electrify this route, we would expect through services between Hull and Manchester to continue and to be operated with electric rolling stock. If a decision is made not to electrify the route, the train service
options include:
 A Hull – Leeds diesel service that allows connections to be
made at Leeds for electric services to Manchester and
beyond;
 A through Hull service via the North TransPennine route,
which would require the operation of diesel services ‘under
the electric wires’ to Manchester Piccadilly, Manchester
Airport, Liverpool or Chester.

 

[northwichcat]

how many people were employed by the railways when I started in 1980

In the Manchester area I imagine there were a lot more rail staff - what are now the Altrincham, Oldham and Bury Metrolink lines had frequent British Rail trains, while a lot of stations would have had British Rail ticket inspectors on platforms.

 

[313103]

If we're ever to get an efficient, modern rail industry, the relics of the past need to go.

Yes the relics of the past should go and that goes for everything including working conditions. The last thing I would want to see is working conditions that wouldn't have looked out of place when Queen Victoria was on the throne.

I am not a great lover of the word 'Efficient'. Efficiency means to most people that they are about to made surplus to requirements (happened to me in 1993) or redundancy (happened to me in 2013). Yet despite the efficiency measures carried out by Beeching, British Rail and the private companies now working in the rail industry we still have a inefficient railway system that now cost more than a bomb to run.

The railways employ about a quarter of the staff in 2013 then when I started in 1980. Tell me that's not efficient?

 

[Manchester77]

Some thoughts I posted on wnxx about what units currently required to run these services, which seem pertinent to the debate here.

Transfer from TPE to Northern:
 Services to Windermere - essentially 1x 185s to cover, any DMU or 319 if wired.
 York to Scarborough - essentially 2x 185s to cover (very tight, more likely 3 or 4 units to cover, 4-car 158s vice 3-car 185?)
Sum = 10/11x 185s displaced from TPX, Northern require 14-16x extra units, all diesel with exception of 4x EMU for Man Air-Blackpool (plus Oxenholme, if confirmed).

Transfer from EMT to TPE:
 the Nottingham – Liverpool portion of the existing EMT Norwich –Liverpool service - 6 diagrams required to cover current timetable, most services pairs of 158s, hence 12x units plus spares. Suggestion that frequency might be increased, so assume 3-car 185 every 30mins as opposed to 4-car 158s every hour.
Sum = 12/13x EMT 158s displaced, 11/12x TPX 185s required.

Transfer from Northern to EMT:
 Cleethorpes to Barton-on-Humber (if Doncaster - Cleethorpes remains with TPE) - 1x 153
Sum = 1x 153 NOR to EMT

Overall sum = Displaced 185s from North-west/Scarborough sufficient to cover ex-EMT Liverpool-Nottingham, displaced EMT 158s sufficient to cover extra Northern services aided by 319s on electrified route(s).

- Would there be any possibility of even in the summer timetable some extensions of Windermere shuttles to Manchester, maybe combined with a Blackpool 319 service?
- Could the Scarborough services not be run as extensions of existing Northern transpennine York terminators. That way you retain the transpennine link to Scarborough.
- For the total, could a few 185s stay for the barrow services which could benefit from the higher speeds of the 185s, after all the depot for the 185s is in manchester.

- Would 2 3 car 185s per hour provide enough capacity or would the capacity increase result in the XC syndrome whereby while there has been a limited capacity increase the higher frequency is more attractive and more people travel

- It's good that there is enough units to go around but each of the TOCs in question could do with more capacity so perhaps upon electrification of Blackpool the 158s which would have come from EMT be used to cover for maybe the release of a few 156s to EMT since looking at the on going East Midlands rail travel thread they could do with some extra capacity. Another possibility would be to cascade the ex-EMT 158s to ATW since they need more units for increase Cambrian line services (so their existing ERTMS 158s be focused on Cambrian duties with the non-ERTMS cascaded 158s used on express workings)

 

[158722]

- Would there be any possibility of even in the summer timetable some extensions of Windermere shuttles to Manchester, maybe combined with a Blackpool 319 service?
- Could the Scarborough services not be run as extensions of existing Northern transpennine York terminators. That way you retain the transpennine link to Scarborough.
- For the total, could a few 185s stay for the barrow services which could benefit from the higher speeds of the 185s, after all the depot for the 185s is in manchester.

- Would 2 3 car 185s per hour provide enough capacity or would the capacity increase result in the XC syndrome whereby while there has been a limited capacity increase the higher frequency is more attractive and more people travel

- It's good that there is enough units to go around but each of the TOCs in question could do with more capacity so perhaps upon electrification of Blackpool the 158s which would have come from EMT be used to cover for maybe the release of a few 156s to EMT since looking at the on going East Midlands rail travel thread they could do with some extra capacity. Another possibility would be to cascade the ex-EMT 158s to ATW since they need more units for increase Cambrian line services (so their existing ERTMS 158s be focused on Cambrian duties with the non-ERTMS cascaded 158s used on express workings)

As regards Scarborough, I wasn't suggesting a shuttle to York, but if the Blackpool-Yorks were extended you would need essentially 2 or 3 extra diagrams to cover the service. Should enough stock be available, extending the Blackpools would make sense, maintaining the current hourly pattern, but instead of running a 4-car 158 every hour, maintain the current 2 or 3-car set on the Blackpool and another 2-car set on a shuttle to York, giving a 30min frequency.

That could possibly present the same problem as you have highlighted with the Liverpool-Nottinghams going to 2 TPH...

As has been commented, the timing of these possible changes has not been mentioned, but I'd suggest it is likely only when Manchester-Leeds-York is wired, after which time, TPX would have an excess of 185s, even with the extra Nottingham service. Who is to say that those 185s could not pass to Northern and be used on Barrow services or indeed, Scarborough? Same trains, same (part or varied) route, different operator...

 

[northwichcat]

As has been commented, the timing of these possible changes has not been mentioned, but I'd suggest it is likely only when Manchester-Leeds-York is wired, after which time, TPX would have an excess of 185s, even with the extra Nottingham service. Who is to say that those 185s could not pass to Northern and be used on Barrow services or indeed, Scarborough? Same trains, same (part or varied) route, different operator...

If you were to transfer Barrow, Scarborough or Middlesbrough to Northern and gave them a small number of 185s why would they want to use the 185s on those services?

Wouldn't it make more sense to have one set of crews who learn 185s rather than scattering a small fleet around everywhere which a lot of crews then sign but rarely work?

 

[Class83]

For the TPE changes, presumably with the 2nd Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds-??? service moving to the Newton le Willows line the 3rd South TPE service will run Liverpool-Warrington-Manchester-Sheffield-Hull, leaving the current Cleethorpes-Airport (perhaps only to Doncaster) and the Norwich (now Nottingham) to Liverpool services as is. I guess the only question would be whether to do a 30 minute frequency on Liverpool-WAC-Manchester which would give a 15-15-30 minute gaps between services from Manchester to Sheffield, or a 20-20-20 from Manchester to Sheffield which would result in 20-40 gaps between Liverpool and Manchester. I suspect the former is better as the stopper appears to take 26 minutes longer than the fast train so will need a 30 minute gap to avoid holdups.

On the stock situation, it looks like Northern will be on 2nd hand only, but it's hopeful for pacer scrapping. TPE can hopefully justify some new electric trains for the North Routes and then pass on the freed 185s for Nottingham-Leeds, Scarborough to Blackpool and replacing the 158s on the Nottingham to Liverpool route. I suspect EMT will try to hang on to their 158s so they can pair or scrap their 153s. No mention of better stock or a transfer to West Coast for TPE Scotland.

 

[Manchester77]

As regards Scarborough, I wasn't suggesting a shuttle to York, but if the Blackpool-Yorks were extended you would need essentially 2 or 3 extra diagrams to cover the service. Should enough stock be available, extending the Blackpools would make sense, maintaining the current hourly pattern, but instead of running a 4-car 158 every hour, maintain the current 2 or 3-car set on the Blackpool and another 2-car set on a shuttle to York, giving a 30min frequency.

That could possibly present the same problem as you have highlighted with the Liverpool-Nottinghams going to 2 TPH...

As has been commented, the timing of these possible changes has not been mentioned, but I'd suggest it is likely only when Manchester-Leeds-York is wired, after which time, TPX would have an excess of 185s, even with the extra Nottingham service. Who is to say that those 185s could not pass to Northern and be used on Barrow services or indeed, Scarborough? Same trains, same (part or varied) route, different operator...

Sorry didn't realise!

It would probably only work if there a double units strengthening the service every hour so there is extra capacity

I'd imagine that the 185s would be well suited on both runs. Following the new TPE timetable the Scarborough services have been messed around so the extension of York terminators would be welcome. I wonder if this Scarborough to Blackpool service could be included as a key service between Manchester and York, since we already have transpennine services calling at Victoria.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I'd imagine that the 185s would be well suited on both runs. Following the new TPE timetable the Scarborough services have been messed around so the extension of York terminators would be welcome. I wonder if this Scarborough to Blackpool service could be included as a key service between Manchester and York, since we already have transpennine services calling at Victoria.

The only trouble is that DfT expects both franchises to "maximise electric operation under the wires".
Manchester-Barrow flies in the face of that (but Manchester-Windermere wouldn't, assuming the wires get that far).

 

[northwichcat]

For the TPE changes, presumably with the 2nd Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds-??? service moving to the Newton le Willows line the 3rd South TPE service will run Liverpool-Warrington-Manchester-Sheffield-Hull, leaving the current Cleethorpes-Airport (perhaps only to Doncaster) and the Norwich (now Nottingham) to Liverpool services as is. I guess the only question would be whether to do a 30 minute frequency on Liverpool-WAC-Manchester which would give a 15-15-30 minute gaps between services from Manchester to Sheffield, or a 20-20-20 from Manchester to Sheffield which would result in 20-40 gaps between Liverpool and Manchester. I suspect the former is better as the stopper appears to take 26 minutes longer than the fast train so will need a 30 minute gap to avoid holdups.

Remember there's a lot of 'ifs' there.

* Manchester-Sheffield may not go to 3tph.
* A Liverpool North TPE service may remain in the form of a Liverpool-Hull service.
* A new Manchester-Sheffield service could be a semi-fast service opposed to an express.
* They could run a Liverpool-Stockport-Sheffield every 30 minutes and a Manchester-Marple-Sheffield service, in the same way the Northern Piccadilly-Liverpool service isn't co-ordinated with the services via Warrington.
* You could run 3tph between Sheffield and Manchester, extend 2 to Liverpool and 1 to Chester which would still give Warrington 3tph to Sheffield albeit from different stations in Warrington.

 

[Merseysider]

Remember there's a lot of 'ifs' there.
* You could run 3tph between Sheffield and Manchester, extend 2 to Liverpool and 1 to Chester which would still give Warrington 3tph to Sheffield albeit from different stations in Warrington.

That'd be interesting, can't picture there being too much demand for direct Chester - Sheffield though?

 

[Manchester77]

The only trouble is that DfT expects both franchises to "maximise electric operation under the wires".
Manchester-Barrow flies in the face of that (but Manchester-Windermere wouldn't, assuming the wires get that far).

Does that mean we could see Barrow services reduced to a 'shuttle' to somewhere like Preston. I'd guess this would also mean the through Buxton - Barrow workings we see now could go?

 

[northwichcat]

That'd be interesting, can't picture there being too much demand for direct Chester - Sheffield though?

You do get some Chester to South Yorkshire passengers on Mid-Cheshire line services. I think the connections at Stockport between Mid-Cheshire and Hope Valley services work better than using the ATW service and changing at Piccadilly.

With having 2 universities Sheffield may start to attract students from different areas if the places served by direct train change e.g. gaining some Cheshire students but losing some Lincolnshire students.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

You do get some Chester to South Yorkshire passengers on Mid-Cheshire line services. I think the connections at Stockport between Mid-Cheshire and Hope Valley services work better than using the ATW service and changing at Piccadilly.

With having 2 universities Sheffield may start to attract students from different areas if the places served by direct train change e.g. gaining some Cheshire students but losing some Lincolnshire students.

You actually get quite a lot for Leeds & Sheffield on the Mid Cheshire Line

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Does anyone think that the wording of the phrase "Consultation Document" has any undertones of the phrase "Fait Accompli" ?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Does anyone think that the wording of the phrase "Consultation Document" has any undertones of the phrase "Fait Accompli" ?

I see what you mean... Our fares will go up (and staffing levels will drop!) whether we like it or not!

I was rather enjoying the discussions on the risks/practicalities of introducing DOO on Northern, but I shall return to the topic at hand:

The proposed route transfers suggested had a particularly strange thing about them- seemingly there's an option to transfer TPE's Cleethorpes route to Northern... but IF that happens, the Barton line would go to EMT?! Surely if Doncaster-Cleethorpes went to Northern there'd be more of a case for Northern retaining the Barton line? Likewise, giving the branch to EMT would surely only make sense if EMT were to have the 'mainline' too.
I don't know what the person who drew up those proposals was drinking, but I'd quite like some, please and thank-you!

 

[northwichcat]

The proposed route transfers suggested had a particularly strange thing about them- seemingly there's an option to transfer TPE's Cleethorpes route to Northern... but IF that happens, the Barton line would go to EMT?! Surely if Doncaster-Cleethorpes went to Northern there'd be more of a case for Northern retaining the Barton line? Likewise, giving the branch to EMT would surely only make sense if EMT were to have the 'mainline' too.
I don't know what the person who drew up those proposals was drinking, but I'd quite like some, please and thank-you!

It was proposed a while back that the main stations on the Liverpool-Warrington-Manchester line should be able to take 6 car 185s. This is in the final Network Rail plans for CP5 as well (although they mention the train length not the specific type of traction.) I imagine they want a half-hourly Liverpool-Sheffield service using 185s to make the platform lengthening work more cost-effective. I also imagine the idea of splitting South TPE and Liverpool-Norwich is to prevent adding or removing carriages en-route which may help reliability.

 

[IanXC]

The proposed route transfers suggested had a particularly strange thing about them- seemingly there's an option to transfer TPE's Cleethorpes route to Northern... but IF that happens, the Barton line would go to EMT?! Surely if Doncaster-Cleethorpes went to Northern there'd be more of a case for Northern retaining the Barton line? Likewise, giving the branch to EMT would surely only make sense if EMT were to have the 'mainline' too.
I don't know what the person who drew up those proposals was drinking, but I'd quite like some, please and thank-you!

I read it as, if the mainline transfers to Northern, Barton would stay as is; if the mainline stays with TPE then Barton would go to EMT. I think its an effort to reduce the number of operators in that area, it'd certainly be easier for EMT to swap stock in via the Lincoln-Grimsby service, than it is for Northern (unless they get the mainline too). I can't see it resulting in any change from it being manned by Cleethorpes depot either way.