GEML: Barrier to upgrade?

[EssexGonzo]

But if you live in Norwich then it is about that journey.

Yes, of course.

But my point was that if you live in Norwich, then statistically you're a minority user of the line (not the same as less important, of course). The service has to cater for the many rather than the few.

 

[captainbigun]

Um, no it isn't.

And whether it is flat or not (which is the point I failed to make earlier), bears not relation to the cost of the infrastructure. Much of the GE is built on less an ideal substrate which makes 100mph costly enough.

 

[TheEdge]

Yes, of course.

But my point was that if you live in Norwich, then statistically you're a minority user of the line (not the same as less important, of course). The service has to cater for the many rather than the few.

No, the service has to cater as best it can for everyone. It has to cater for you, it has to cater to the Norwich - London flow, it has to cater for the Norwich - Diss flow, it has to cater for them all. It has to cater for the freights.

The GEML has to be lots of things to lots of people, which it just can't be.

 

[eastdyke]

Yes, of course.

But my point was that if you live in Norwich, then statistically you're a minority user of the line (not the same as less important, of course). The service has to cater for the many rather than the few.

The end of line user would be in the minority for most (but not all) routes to/from London.

I think that we are pretty much agreed!

My point is that the political campaign 'Norwich in 90' does not translate into 'better' for everybody else which could easily be assumed by passengers in other places. Hence my opinion that a 20 minute interval service at around 110 minutes end to end would be better for the majority.

 

[EssexGonzo]

The end of line user would be in the minority for most (but not all) routes to/from London.

I think that we are pretty much agreed!

My point is that the political campaign 'Norwich in 90' does not translate into 'better' for everybody else which could easily be assumed by passengers in other places. Hence my opinion that a 20 minute interval service at around 110 minutes end to end would be better for the majority.

Agree. Or another way.....simplistic political sound bites aren't normally the best approach or do-able.

 

[chubs]

It remains to be seen whether or not the small number of 'Norwich in 90' services will call at any of the places that you mention (I suspect not).

Perhaps, when the time comes, you would like to volunteer to break the news?

It wasn't that long ago every other (off peak) Intercity train only called Ipswich and Colchester anyway. Right now does one train an hour call at Stowmarket and the other Diss?

For the sake of stopping for a couple of minutes it seems to make more logical sense than to run a 'shuttle' service between Ipswich and Norwich calling at Diss and Stowmarket, which probably wouldn't be feasible anyway.

 

[dk1]

i expect many commuter flows into any London Terminal far outweigh passenger numbers to their long distance companions but that doesn't mean the Intercity services shouldn't have a sexy schedule. Norwich in 90 is a franchise commitment that is going to happen in the next few years & I for one am really looking forward to it becoming a daily reality rather than a one off to recover the service. Oh & if you think Ipswich-Norwich is flat just come for a ride up front with me & see how well I keep to time if coasting

 

[eastdyke]

It wasn't that long ago every other (off peak) Intercity train only called Ipswich and Colchester anyway. Right now does one train an hour call at Stowmarket and the other Diss?

For the sake of stopping for a couple of minutes it seems to make more logical sense than to run a 'shuttle' service between Ipswich and Norwich calling at Diss and Stowmarket, which probably wouldn't be feasible anyway.

All trains off peak currently call at Diss, Ipswich, Manningtree and Colchester.

Typically (in the public timetable) the faster up trains are 109 mins end to end, whilst the slower up trains are 115 mins calling also at Stowmarket, Chelmsford and Stratford.

It does mean (with 3 TPH) that 'Norwich in 90' services will start a few minutes before the following train and arrive a few minutes after the preceeding train.

With 3 TPH there will be no need of any 'local shuttles', they used to run pre-Beeching with a journey time (Norwich - Ipswich) of around 100 minutes and with 11 stops.

@dk1 now that would slow you up!

 

[Class 170101]

But if you live in Norwich then it is about that journey. Politicians have been allowed to manoeuvre a very marginal and potentially inefficient expectation.

As I said earlier in the thread, the (meaning all) users of the GEML would IMO be better served by a robust 20 minute interval service at around 110 minutes end to end.

No TOC will ever wish to eschew the revenue to be earned from passengers to/from Manningtree, Stowmarket and Diss.

It remains to be seen whether or not the small number of 'Norwich in 90' services will call at any of the places that you mention (I suspect not).

Norwich to Liverpool Street in 100 minutes calling at Colchester and Ipswich and Norwich I consider is feasible now with the current Rolling Stock on a regular basis.

90 minutes stopping at Ipswich only is just possible to achieve with Class 90s and Mark IIIs. Therefore I reckon if you added one stop to the new trains that would be it to maintain Norwich in 90, however no more stops. I wouldn't consider any of Manningtree, Stowmarket or Diss worthy of the service frequencies they receive today off peak.

 

[fat_boy_pete]

Norwich to Liverpool Street in 100 minutes calling at Colchester and Ipswich and Norwich I consider is feasible now with the current Rolling Stock on a regular basis.

See today's 17:00 ex LST, took 96 minutes calling at Ipswich and Diss. Left 1 late, 2 late at Chelmsford, arrived 1 early at Ipswich, arrived 2 early in WTT at Norwich and 5 early on public timetable.

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/G01366/2017/05/08/advanced

Remove the 3 minute timetabled allowance for slam doors at Ipswich and Diss and replace with 90 seconds for sliding doors instead, plus add the better acceleration of the Stadlers, and closing one or two level crossings between IPS and NRW and bob's your uncle. Norwich in 90 with 2 stops.

 

[LAX54]

Can someone explain why, in 2017, we have the situation where the fastest morning peak train London -> Norwich (~115 miles) takes 1hr and 44min (with 2 stops), whereas the the similar London -> Bristol Parkway (~112 miles - also 2 stops) is 25mins quicker?

Both have 2 stops, both are HSTs, however the GEML has the benefits of electrification & flatter terrain. With electrification & Class 800s on their way, surely this differential will become even larger.

What is the underlying reason that makes improving the GEML so difficult?

since when have HST's run on the GEML. maybe back in the 80's on 'Merrymakers' and that's it !

 

[LAX54]

Make that at least 5. And add 'and make the timetable even less resilient in times of disruption'.

that could be 6

 

[dk1]

since when have HST's run on the GEML. maybe back in the 80's on 'Merrymakers' and that's it !

NENTA used them in the mid-90s for one season but the Southall crash put pay to that as it left GW Trains short of sets.

 

[Rick1984]

How much does your average flying junction cost?
I think the best to hope for is incremental improvements. Also could clever modern signaling overcome some of the problems of only two tracks?

Classically in Britain we've had regional and intercity trains. Perhaps we need a new intermediate category. Ethier Regional Express or
Inter-Regional.

TPE and Northern Connect are already like this. Likes of SWT mainline trains would come under the same scope.
Requirements would be 100mph capable running and at least a trolley service in a medium density layout of interior

 

[TheEdge]

How much does your average flying junction cost?
I think the best to hope for is incremental improvements. Also could clever modern signaling overcome some of the problems of only two tracks?

It might help but its not going to fix it, Chelmsford is the biggest issue and signalling wont fix that.

 

[Bald Rick]

It might help but its not going to fix it, Chelmsford is the biggest issue and signalling wont fix that.

The biggest issue is the mix of traffic, and ETCS won't fix that either.

 

[dk1]

It might help but its not going to fix it, Chelmsford is the biggest issue and signalling wont fix that.

Beaulieu Park might help a little especially if it has the planned 775m capable loops.

 

[eastdyke]

Beaulieu Park might help a little especially if it has the planned 775m capable loops.

Is there a any current timetable for this? The Beaulieu website says:

New train station
Network Rail are set to develop a new station at Beaulieu following a £22m investment, making commuting into the capital even quicker and easier. It is anticipated that the station will open between 2019 and 2022 and is set to provide a service running every 10 minutes (approximately) at peak times.

http://www.beaulieu.uk.com/location/travel-links

Whose £22m? The developer's?
Doesn't sound nearly enough to me.
I think that the price tag on Cambridge North was around £50m.

 

[dk1]

Is there a any current timetable for this?

Not as far as I am aware. Keeps popping up every now & again.

 

[Class 170101]

Beaulieu Park might help a little especially if it has the planned 775m capable loops.

I wouldn't hold your breath that those loops you refer to will appear. Not hearing positive vibes on this.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Given that the recent Bromsgrove track remodelling was widely quoted as costing £100m (admittedly with signal re-control over a wider area thrown in) and the four platform station (which is well shy of the 12-car lengths needed at Beaulieu Park) at £24m, on a currently unelectrified route with a reasonable diversionary alternative I would have thought that Beaulieu Park would cost well north of £100million at current prices, let alone in 2022.