TPE WCML service changes from May 2019

[Starmill]

Where, OOI?

Tickets to Rice Lane are also valid to Walton and vv.

 

[deltic08]

As the VTWC Voyagers have been doing for years. At least TPE will only be using 185s temporarily on the WCML.

Equally disgraceful.

 

[Chester1]

I know, but they do have the power to recommend.

Which in the current political climate means very little.

Equally disgraceful.

No it is not. Running 10 diesels under the wires for 15 years is much worse than running 3 under the wires while long term units are being tested and then drivers trained. With testing starting this month and the new services starting in May the over lap should be a few months.

 

[EE Andy b1]

No it is not. Running 10 diesels under the wires for 15 years is much worse than running 3 under the wires while long term units are being tested and then drivers trained.

And why was that? In the 2012 WC franchise change both the Virgin/Stagecoach and First Group had proposed short set electric multiple units (mini-Pendolino) to replace Class 221 on Scottish services. The DfT put an end to that with there corrupt failed bidding process!
So we still wait.
Off Topic, sorry.

 

[deltic08]

No it is not. Running 10 diesels under the wires for 15 years is much worse than running 3 under the wires while long term units are being tested and then drivers trained. With testing starting this month and the new services starting in May the over lap should be a few months.

That is what I said. Running Voyagers under the wires is equally disgraceful when there was an opportunity to make then bimodes.

 

[Chester1]

That is what I said. Running Voyagers under the wires is equally disgraceful when there was an opportunity to make then bimodes.

I said they were different! One is long term the other is short term therefore I do not think they are "equally disgraceful". I think TPE using 3 x 185s is a reasonable short term solution.

 

[a_c_skinner]

Exactly how useful is tilt on the WCML?

The trains were ordered for 140 MPH which seems off the cards long term and in any case wouldn't speed up journey times that much from 125MPH. I think the ECML allows a somewhat higher cant deficiency (is that the term - basically higher sideways forces?) than the WCML, though please don't ask me where I heard that. The part of the WCML where tilt seems important when travelling is the south, to be bypassed for fast trains by HS2. HS2 classic compatible trains won't have tilt.
If I am right WCML procurement could be a lot simpler and bi-mode vehicles readily available. Potentially it wouldn't need micro fleets either.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Tickets to Rice Lane are also valid to Walton and vv.

Makes sense. I guess that is more due to PFs as they have in practice been treated that way for years.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Exactly how useful is tilt on the WCML?

The trains were ordered for 140 MPH which seems off the cards long term and in any case wouldn't speed up journey times that much from 125MPH. I think the ECML allows a somewhat higher cant deficiency (is that the term - basically higher sideways forces?) than the WCML, though please don't ask me where I heard that. The part of the WCML where tilt seems important when travelling is the south, to be bypassed for fast trains by HS2. HS2 classic compatible trains won't have tilt.
If I am right WCML procurement could be a lot simpler and bi-mode vehicles readily available. Potentially it wouldn't need micro fleets either.

Much as I hate the seats, 80x would do.

 

[notlob.divad]

Suggest that the solution is for TransPennine Express to introduce a new inter-availability rule stating that tickets from St Helens Central are valid also from Lea Green. Failing that, a new easement would help. This would be an obvious and sensible permanent inter-availability rule (I assume it doesn't already exist...). A new one on the Merseyrail Northern line was added recently, so there is even local precedent. I would be fascinated to hear what TPE say in response, and if they agree to take any action. I feel that if it were raised by an MP they would at the very least consider it properly. If your MP isn't the one responsible for the stations in question, it may be slightly more difficult. I would actually do this myself, as I'm really intrigued to hear what they'd say to this, but it would far less effective if it came from mine than if it came from a St Helens MP. You could raise broader concerns too but of course it is very unlikely that they can influence TransPennine to change the timetable once it has been validated by Network Rail. If if they could, there could be technical reasons why it cannot be done. However, there is no technical reason why inter-availability cannot be arranged. If the matter is raised, TransPennine have no excuses for not taking action. Now is the perfect time to look at that, just before tickets go on sale.

Comparing Rice Lane & Walton with St. Helens Central and St Helens Junction / Lea Green. Is nuts. Rice Lane and Walton are basically to sets of platforms for the same station, in fact it would make everyone's life easier if they did the honest thing and called them the same name. (and put in a footpath between the Walton ticket office and the Rice Lane, North Bound Platform.) The St. Helens Stations are over 2 miles apart. If I buy a return ticket to one or the other, I expect to be able to return to that station, not a station on the other side of town. So unless First TPE are going to start running a free shuttle bus between the two stations I don't think this would be an adequate suggestion.

 

[notlob.divad]

They should already know by now - I have sent an email to the St.Helens Star (the local free weekly paper.)........

Excellent, I do hope you pointed out that they are in Breech of the Franchise commitment by doing this, on the follwongn grounds.

1: There is no TPE departure from Liverpool between 0700 and 0959 that calls at a St. Helens station on route to Glasgow
2: There is no TPE departure from Liverpool between 1600 and 1859 that calls at a St. Helens station on route to Glasgow.
3: There is only TPW arrival in Liverpool between 1000 and 1559 from a St. Helens station (Lea Green) on route from Glasgow, when there should be 2.
4: There is no arrival in Liverpool between 1900 and 2159 from a St. Helens station on route from Glasgow.

Sadly despite being the closest station to my registered voting address, St. Helens Central is not within the same constituency as my MP. So writing to them would be futile. However I am very tempted to write to the local papers to outline this. Whilst the stations on the 1830 line have seen an improvement in service provision out of the recent upgrade works, (debate about Lea Green v Junction aside) this new TPE service was the only improvement the line through the Centre of the town was supposed to see. We were left off the Northern Connect routes, despite meeting all of their criteria, because of this new infrequent service being provided, by the more prestigeous operator, and now we see what it looks like it is an insult.

 

[notlob.divad]

Don't you just love the inevitable sneering St.Helens-Glasgow traffic comments that were inevitable from the minute we dared criticise the timetable plan. Conveniently ignoring that the train directly goes via England's biggest tourist trap..........

For me, the irritating thing is the fact that locally, we've been sold this new services thing by Merseytravel about Long Distance trains, and the improvements to St Helens Junction. The last part of the bargain was made, just unfortunate that they're not running the long distance trains from there, despite Junction being both longer, flatter, (Lea Green is on a 1 in 80 gradient) and having an actual waiting room, even if it is ancient. So to be told that we're getting the grand total of one train, that stops at a different station on the way back is somewhat of a letdown . Imagine the abuse my lot would take if we decided to divert most of the hourly VT Liverpool's to head to scotland instead, but don't worry everyone, we'll stop a few at Wigan so you can get home. Would go down like a cup of cold sick .

Yes the snide comments on here are as you say inevitable and always from the same few. I have come to recognise the usernames and simply ignore them as it is equally inevitable that I guess what they have written as soon as I see the user name.

Whilst I made the points above about the usefulness of the trains to get to Scotland and the Lakes, it is obviously not just those locations

You make the point of the fuss that would be kicked up by diverting the VT to Scotland, I think an equally if not more apt comparrison is the fuss that would be made if VT decided to skip Wilmslow on all but a handful of their Manchester - London services, yet carried on running them through the station. The uproar there would be from the town, the MP would be on every TV station condemning the government (even if it where there own party), the very thought of it would be condemned by all. However a town of 4 times the size, is promissed a tiny uplift in service provision of 3 long distance trains each way a day and are left with this shambles, and instead people snigger and laugh when it is pointed out that we ar not getting what was offered.

 

[MDB1images]

TPE on the West Coast have a good record of starting out slowly but building steadily to the point of increasing services which haven't existed or run for years so it's incredibly early days for the Liverpool services and a market needs building.

For me if TPE do stop more services at Lea Green/St Helens (as Bolton)further down the line it needs to be pick up only Northbound as otherwise long distance passengers will soon get left standing by the very savvy commuters (and other 'in the know' travellers)who value every minute saved in the commute and grumbles will start.

For now though a service that hasn't run for years is a welcome addition.

 

[Starmill]

So unless First TPE are going to start running a free shuttle bus between the two stations I don't think this would be an adequate suggestion.

If you think that customers should have to pay twice to travel to a different station then you're probably more in common with some train companies than you think. Some of the inter-available stations are much, much more than two miles apart. It should be obvious that some people will be using connecting transport anyway, so they'll either be on the bus, in a taxi or getting a lift to a station in the first place. Lewes and Uckfield are very considerably more than 2 moles apart, so are you suggesting we withdraw interavilability between them?

 

[notlob.divad]

If you think that customers should have to pay twice to travel to a different station then you're probably more in common with some train companies than you think. Some of the inter-available stations are much, much more than two miles apart. It should be obvious that some people will be using connecting transport anyway, so they'll either be on the bus, in a taxi or getting a lift to a station in the first place. Lewes and Uckfield are very considerably more than 2 moles apart, so are you suggesting we withdraw interavilability between them?

When inter-available stations is used for the benefit of the customer, to allow travel to a group of stations that recieve frequent trains, that is all well and good. But when it is used as an excuse to split an already infrequent service even more infrequently between two distant stations that seems a bit far fetched.

FYI the St Helens Stations grouping consisting of St Helens Central and St Helens Junction was abolished in 1988. There is zero chance of it being reintroduced to the benefit of passengers.

 

[Mathew S]

TPE on the West Coast have a good record of starting out slowly but building steadily to the point of increasing services which haven't existed or run for years so it's incredibly early days for the Liverpool services and a market needs building.

For me if TPE do stop more services at Lea Green/St Helens (as Bolton)further down the line it needs to be pick up only Northbound as otherwise long distance passengers will soon get left standing by the very savvy commuters (and other 'in the know' travellers)who value every minute saved in the commute and grumbles will start.

For now though a service that hasn't run for years is a welcome addition.

Absolutely. It is, however you look at it, a start. If I worked for TPE and I was reading this I'd be wondering why I'd bothered to provide the service at all. Instead of denigrating it why not look at who it will benefit and the opportunities for growth if its successful.

 

[Starmill]

There is zero chance of it being reintroduced to the benefit of passengers.

Obviously not, given that a number of new additions to the interavilable stations list we've seen recently.

There's no excuse for not doing it.

 

[Starmill]

1: There is no TPE departure from Liverpool between 0700 and 0959 that calls at a St. Helens station on route to Glasgow
2: There is no TPE departure from Liverpool between 1600 and 1859 that calls at a St. Helens station on route to Glasgow.
3: There is only TPW arrival in Liverpool between 1000 and 1559 from a St. Helens station (Lea Green) on route from Glasgow, when there should be 2.
4: There is no arrival in Liverpool between 1900 and 2159 from a St. Helens station on route from

This is all very well and good but I'm not sure what it is about St Helens in particular that means a breach of the franchise TSRs is such a problem? TSRs have been tacitly abandoned for local stations between Cheadle Hulme and Macclesfield, and the government have allowed Northern to run at far lower levels than TSR on the Harrogate line, mid Cheshire line, between Sheffield and Worksop and on the Tyne Valley line for almost two years now (and elsewhere besides). It remains to be seen how much of these will be corrected in May. In other words it's pretty poor that the TSRs have been abandoned or delayed for so long, but it's also not news.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Exactly how useful is tilt on the WCML?

There are a lot of sharp curves throughout the WCML, and not particularly concentrated in the south.
Carnforth-Carlisle and Beattock-Carstairs are full of sharp reverse curves, thanks to Joseph Locke's design avoiding any tunnels.
You get something like 15 minutes saving Euston-Crewe, and similar from Crewe to Glasgow.
The route has been optimised for tilt and EPS speeds with class 390/221.
The underlying PS speeds hardly changed during the WCRM programme (which was concentrated south of Crewe), and are still mainly at 110mph (less in the hills).
The only bit of the WCML allowing 125mph non-tilt is 10 miles of the route between Bushbury and Rickerscote (Wolverhampton-Stafford), and that was to suit XC.

 

[driver_m]

I did a non scientific experiment on my non railway connected mates yesterday, told them about this proposal to see what their reaction was. I can't print any of the replies on here in full but if I said a urine take, a ''ahem" joke and a particular good reply from one who asked if Northern were doing it, as it sounds like their kind of 'customer service'. Then I think I was right to criticise it.

For the record our council area has a population of 176000 people, which isn't exactly small. When tiny places in comparison such as Atherstone and Stone currently get hourly Londons and we don't, were not exactly asking for much. Just stop 2 trains that would be going fairly slow anyway. Look at Stockport, virtually everything stops there on account of the slow speed through the station, (forget the covenant thing, XC broke that ages ago)

 

[a_c_skinner]

Was I right that the ECML tolerates more lateral force than the WCML? I realise tilt does make a difference, but I'm still intrigued about how much, especially now 140 MPH is off the cards. The bulk of the WCML speed up seemed to be omitting stops rather than anything else (to a casual observer at least). So I think I was asking a bit more than does tilt help, more how much. We've speculated about this before:
When the GNWR Blackpool services have been talked about (again I've no memory of where) there have been observations that the Mk4/91 sets might benefit from looking at speeds in places. I assume the issue is passenger comfort rather than safe traffic.

 

[absolutelymilk]

I've created a new thread to discuss whether St Helens deserves more services, to be found at
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...on-the-new-liverpool-scotland-service.176204/

 

[notlob.divad]

This is all very well and good but I'm not sure what it is about St Helens in particular that means a breach of the franchise TSRs is such a problem? TSRs have been tacitly abandoned for local stations between Cheadle Hulme and Macclesfield, and the government have allowed Northern to run at far lower levels than TSR on the Harrogate line, mid Cheshire line, between Sheffield and Worksop and on the Tyne Valley line for almost two years now (and elsewhere besides). It remains to be seen how much of these will be corrected in May. In other words it's pretty poor that the TSRs have been abandoned or delayed for so long, but it's also not news.

It is up to the people who loose out because of those breaches to flag them up and campaign to hold the company and the institutions with responsibility for these services to account. They have my support.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The TPE franchise TSR for the Liverpool-Glasgow services show 3 calls at St Helens Central, one 0700-0959, one 1000-1559 and one 1600-1859.
There is a note which says calls may be at St Helens Jn rather than Central.
There is another note in the Manchester-Scotland table which says that calls at Lockerbie and Motherwell may be shared between Manchester and Liverpool services.
ie the total number remains the same but may be for different origin/destinations.

 

[BMIFlyer]

Chances are the 350 will return to the U.K and head straight to LNWR.

I’m afraid the class 350 damaged in the horse incident will likely be written off. Siemens have come over from Germany to have a look and say that the underframe is too damaged underneath to repair it.

Strangely an email was sent out yesterday saying it will be repaired but I believe this was written a couple of weeks ago, by fleet.

Looking like LNWR might now have a hybrid (5 car) set in service to compensate using redundant trailers from the damaged TPE 350.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Looking like LNWR might now have a hybrid (5 car) set in service to compensate using redundant trailers from the damaged TPE 350.

LNR won't want a single 5-car set, it will mess with the formations. They are a 4-8-12 car operation. I suspect they'll take a couple of extra 319s instead.

 

[CAF397]

I'm shocked at this, obviously the damage 2 horses can do v a train is quite major. Of the 2 LM 350s that collided at Watford, what became of the more severely damaged unit?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm shocked at this, obviously the damage 2 horses can do v a train is quite major. Of the 2 LM 350s that collided at Watford, what became of the more severely damaged unit?

Pretty sure it is being or has been repaired. But as it was a side-swipe the frame is probably not buckled, it was just the bodyside smashed in.

 

[BMIFlyer]

Pretty sure it is being or has been repaired. But as it was a side-swipe the frame is probably not buckled, it was just the bodyside smashed in.

Certainly hasn’t been repaired as it’s still in pieces at Ardwick.

Was planned to go to Wolverton and then that was changed to Germany.

Today’s news is it won’t be fixed as the frame is bent. Lots of damage on the unit including parts of the underframe equipment ripped off.

 

[CAF397]

Crossed wires .I asked about the LM 350 that was in a collision and where it was now.

The 350 at Ardwick has apparently had its gangway and coupler removed, but nothing else touched.