Whilst there are a few services a day from Lancaster to Carlisle up the coast, you'd be pretty desperate to use one all the way (rather than the relatively frequent 125mph service up the WCML).
Similarly, nobody is going to sit on a 153 all the way from Peterborough to Doncaster (via Lincoln), when there are HSTs/ 225s going up the ECML.
You might as well say that the London Underground is inappropriate for journeys between Upminster and central London (ignoring the faster National Rail services), or Manchester Metrolink is inappropriate for journeys between Eccles/ Rochdale/ Manchester Airport/ Ashton (etc) and central Manchester (ignoring the faster National Rail services)
You've obviously never been in Northern land with some of the ridiculously long runs they put 142s on- more than three hours! (Can anyone help me with specific routes?)
Lincoln-Hull clocks up the longest pacer run
<snip> </snip>
2C76 1625 Lincoln Central to Hull - a total journey time of 3 hours, 24 minutes
It's a through train for operational convenience, rather than any end-to-end passengers. The only people who'd use that service through Sheffield are those going from Worksop/ stations in "south Rotherham" (e.g. Kiveton) to Meadowhall - it's a SYPTE requirement to have some through service.
Lincoln to Hull is going to be significantly faster via Doncaster (even via Retford and Doncaster) - this service is a "slow" from Sheffield to Doncaster and from Doncaster to Hull - so you'd have to be a particular type of enthusiast to spent three and a half hours on a 142...
See it instead as a peak-extension of a Sheffield - Doncaster stopper (to Hull) - providing additional capacity rather than replacing the regular 158s on Hull trips.
321's work the 17:02 stopper from Liverpool St to Norwich before forming a normal service in place of a 90+Mk3+DVT
I thought that this was the extension of a London - Ipswich path (to Norwich), i.e. it's not
instead of a 90, it's additional?
350s on LM's London Euston-Birmingham New Street
While /1s have a suburban door layout, it could be argued that the interior is definitely not suburban, being 2+2 with tables. /3s even less so, with (I think) 4 more tables than /1s per set
I don't understand the pigeon-holing that some people have about "suburban" and "Inter City" - if it's a 110mph train with 2+2 seating (and air conditioning IIRC?) then it's not restricted to trundling around suburbs on all-stops services.
A train/unit isn't just defined by the positions of its doors.
Liverpool to Birmingham is worse (where there are some /2s as well) as LM provide the only direct services between Liverpool and Birmingham. Virgin provide 4tph between London and Birmingham so the only end to end travellers on the LM London to Birmingham are the people who want to travel for less than the Virgin fare. It's a reasonable expectation that if you travel on the budget service you get a lower standard of train.
Agreed (though I'd quibble about a fourth VT service per hour?).
I've no problem with offering slower/ "inferior" trains on stoppers, where there is a faster "superior" alternative (and therefore most/all people on the slow service are going to be doing local journeys).
It's more of an issue on a line like Lincoln - Sheffield where there are likely to be a reasonable number of "through" passengers, but no faster alternative.
