Ideas for HS2 and Post-HS2 WCML Timetables

[Jorge Da Silva]

Lockerbie in the wrong place - it's on the Edinburgh branch

I don't see why you'd stop random Liverpools at Crewe rather than just one or both per hour "im Takt". Same with EM Hub.

Personally, I'd stop everything at Brum and Crewe for interchange.

According to ProjectMapping it is just be the lines to Edinburgh/Glasgow divide i.e between Carstairs and Carlisle I have chosen to serve it as part of a Glasgow service

Edit:

I am sure what you are saying in your second point

 

[si404]

WRT the southern WCML:

Currently, off peak, there's 12tph on the fast lines AFAICS: 9 Virgin, 1 LM Trent Valley, 2 LM Birmingham (the other Birmingham seems to be on the slows).

Chester still needs it's ICWC service (not replaced by HS2 service). Stoke probably could do with a residual 1tph ICWC to back up its HS2 service, as well as provide places like MK with Manchester service. Coventry probably can't justify 3tph ICWC with Birmingham passengers removed, but it would still need 2tph. That's 4tph ICWC.

Given a lot of the purpose of building super-fast tracks in the West Coast corridor was additional commuter service, Northampton ought to have 4tph fast.

That leaves 4tph for Trent Valley, which is obviously overkill, but we don't have to fill all the paths initially - 2tph would be plenty.

So an embroynic plan for it might be something like:

1tph IC Euston - Milton Keynes - Rugby - Coventry - International - New Street - Sandwell & Dudley - Wolverhampton - Stafford - Crewe ...
1tph IC Euston - Watford Junction - Milton Keynes - Coventry - International - New Street ...
1tph IC Euston - Milton Keynes - Stafford - Crewe - Chester ...
1tph IC Euston - Watford Junction - Milton Keynes - Nuneaton - Tamworth - Stoke - Congeleton - Macclesfield - Stockport - Piccadilly
2tph IR Euston - Leighton Buzzard - Bletchley - Milton Keynes - Wolverton - Northampton - Rugby - Coventry ...
2tph IR Euston - Watford Junction - Milton Keynes - Northampton - Long Buckby - Rugby - Coventry ...
1tph IR Euston - Milton Keynes - Rugby - Nuneaton - Atherstone - Tamworth - Lichfield - Rugeley - Stafford - Stone - Stoke
1tph IR Euston - Watford Junction - Milton Keynes - Rugby - Nuneaton - Tamworth - Lichfield - Rugeley - Stoke - Longport - Alsager - Crewe

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would agree (though of course I would!) that adding a Bletchley stop to the fast services would be very welcome. Other than the 1852 which does do Leighton-Bletchley-MKC there aren't many of these services. Yet quite a lot of Bletchley passengers (from the 1816 off Euston there are more than 50 on a daily basis, possibly even more) do still use these trains and change at Leighton onto the following Southern service.

 

[VT 390]

WRT the southern WCML:

Currently, off peak, there's 12tph on the fast lines AFAICS: 9 Virgin, 1 LM Trent Valley, 2 LM Birmingham (the other Birmingham seems to be on the slows).

Chester still needs it's ICWC service (not replaced by HS2 service). Stoke probably could do with a residual 1tph ICWC to back up its HS2 service, as well as provide places like MK with Manchester service. Coventry probably can't justify 3tph ICWC with Birmingham passengers removed, but it would still need 2tph. That's 4tph ICWC.

Given a lot of the purpose of building super-fast tracks in the West Coast corridor was additional commuter service, Northampton ought to have 4tph fast.

That leaves 4tph for Trent Valley, which is obviously overkill, but we don't have to fill all the paths initially - 2tph would be plenty.

So an embroynic plan for it might be something like:

1tph IC Euston - Milton Keynes - Rugby - Coventry - International - New Street - Sandwell & Dudley - Wolverhampton - Stafford - Crewe ...
1tph IC Euston - Watford Junction - Milton Keynes - Coventry - International - New Street ...
1tph IC Euston - Milton Keynes - Stafford - Crewe - Chester ...
1tph IC Euston - Watford Junction - Milton Keynes - Nuneaton - Tamworth - Stoke - Congeleton - Macclesfield - Stockport - Piccadilly
2tph IR Euston - Leighton Buzzard - Bletchley - Milton Keynes - Wolverton - Northampton - Rugby - Coventry ...
2tph IR Euston - Watford Junction - Milton Keynes - Northampton - Long Buckby - Rugby - Coventry ...
1tph IR Euston - Milton Keynes - Rugby - Nuneaton - Atherstone - Tamworth - Lichfield - Rugeley - Stafford - Stone - Stoke
1tph IR Euston - Watford Junction - Milton Keynes - Rugby - Nuneaton - Tamworth - Lichfield - Rugeley - Stoke - Longport - Alsager - Crewe

i would have 1 IC tph running non stop to Rugby otherwise they will have a slightly increased journey time to London, or is the demand there not that high?

 

[VT 390]

View attachment 58049

UPDATED:

• York/Sheffield-London Euston Included
• 3tph shown between Leeds and London
• Stops where trains divide are now shown with no fill to distinguish them from normal stops.
• More stops at Birmingham Interchange

I thought that some of the Sheffield's were going to run north an rejoin HS2 to go either to Leeds or the ECML

 

[ABB125]

I've got out my fineliners (not crayons - too thick!) and drawn HS2, WCML, MML and ECML service patterns. On the HS2 and and ECML sides, a coloured dot where lines split denotes the train splitting. I will mention three things: 1) splitting points aren't at stations on my map purely for ease of drawing; for example, the splitting points between Leeds and Sheffield would actually be at Sheffield; and 2) I don't really know why Preston gets 4tph to London, I think I've done it because everyone else seems to; therefore, if Preston doesn't warrant this service the one that split to go to Manchester via Stoke would send both halves to Manchester; and 3) the extension from Preston to Blackpool on HS2 is there if the WCML Blackpool service I've planned doesn't happen.
Apologies if you can't read my writing. If you would like anything explaining please ask.

 

[Ianno87]

i would have 1 IC tph running non stop to Rugby otherwise they will have a slightly increased journey time to London, or is the demand there not that high?

If you followed that logic for everywhere yiu'd have (beyond MK) at least 1tph non-stop to each of Rugby, Coventry, Nuneaton (peak) and Tamworth (peak), and then a tranche of services to serve MK etc.

Instead you could get say 2tph Coventry-Rugby-MK-Euston and 2tph Lichfield-Tamworth-Nuneaton-Rugby-MK-Euston.

Slight cost on journey time, but more than compensate by frequency.

Remember that with HS2, almost all demand from Stafford/Birmingham and beyond will be diverted onto HS2. Therefore only havimg classic trains run with one or two stops risks them being relatively empty whilst not relieving demand MK southwards properly.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

I thought that some of the Sheffield's were going to run north an rejoin HS2 to go either to Leeds or the ECML

That's planned for NPR i think but I will include NPR in the next update as I have included HS1 as well! Basically showing the High Speed Network by 2040

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

I've got out my fineliners (not crayons - too thick!) and drawn HS2, WCML, MML and ECML service patterns. On the HS2 and and ECML sides, a coloured dot where lines split denotes the train splitting. I will mention three things: 1) splitting points aren't at stations on my map purely for ease of drawing; for example, the splitting points between Leeds and Sheffield would actually be at Sheffield; and 2) I don't really know why Preston gets 4tph to London, I think I've done it because everyone else seems to; therefore, if Preston doesn't warrant this service the one that split to go to Manchester via Stoke would send both halves to Manchester; and 3) the extension from Preston to Blackpool on HS2 is there if the WCML Blackpool service I've planned doesn't happen.
Apologies if you can't read my writing. If you would like anything explaining please ask.

Thank You so much really appreciate that will edit tomorrow or next week when I have time.

 

[si404]

I thought that some of the Sheffield's were going to run north an rejoin HS2 to go either to Leeds or the ECML

That's planned for NPR i think

It is proposed for NPR, but to suppliment the planned Birmingham-NE HS2 services. London HS2 services would not run through Sheffield.

 

[VT 390]

It is proposed for NPR, but to suppliment the planned Birmingham-NE HS2 services. London HS2 services would not run through Sheffield.

Will there be enough platform capacity for terminating services? I don't see where any new platforms could be added

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Will there be enough platform capacity for terminating services? I don't see where any new platforms could be added

I heard there were plans for an additional platform (Platform 9) but I would expect some track modifications too

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

I've got out my fineliners (not crayons - too thick!) and drawn HS2, WCML, MML and ECML service patterns. On the HS2 and and ECML sides, a coloured dot where lines split denotes the train splitting. I will mention three things: 1) splitting points aren't at stations on my map purely for ease of drawing; for example, the splitting points between Leeds and Sheffield would actually be at Sheffield; and 2) I don't really know why Preston gets 4tph to London, I think I've done it because everyone else seems to; therefore, if Preston doesn't warrant this service the one that split to go to Manchester via Stoke would send both halves to Manchester; and 3) the extension from Preston to Blackpool on HS2 is there if the WCML Blackpool service I've planned doesn't happen.
Apologies if you can't read my writing. If you would like anything explaining please ask.

Using the link below I have come up with part of a timetable:

https://assets.publishing.service.g...s2-released-capacity-study-summary-report.pdf

Some of the new Services (tph)

• 1 Blackpool-London via Birmingham
• 1 London-Crewe (LNW)
• 1 Manchester-London via Crewe and Wilmslow
• 1 Rochdale-London via Stoke
• 2 Northampton-London (LNW)
• 1 Wolverhampton-London (LNW)
• 1 Holyhead-London
• 1 Llandudno-London
• 1 Wrexham-London

In Addition I need

• 1 Glasgow service
• 1 Edinburgh service
• 1 London-Crewe via Trent Valley (LNW)

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

On the document I have provided in my previous post it says on Page 14 that there is the possibility of a Liverpool-Birmingham service depending on the Crewe hub.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Changes:

• Extended Sheffield services to Leeds
• New Liverpool-Birmingham services

 

[Bletchleyite]

TBH I'd stop everything at Crewe and stations to and including Carlisle. Connectivity is more important than speed to me.

And lose the Os for "stops sometimes" - just stop always or never on a given service.

 

[gordonthemoron]

just a thought, post HS2 could they route all freight via Weedon and send all WCML passenger trains via Northampton?

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Deleted

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Higher Resolution and you can see HS1, HS2 and NPR service patterns together. Will work on WCML.

 

[Bletchleyite]

just a thought, post HS2 could they route all freight via Weedon and send all WCML passenger trains via Northampton?

That'd slow them down too much. No sense sending anything via Northampton if it isn't going to stop there, and Northampton (unlike MK) does not justify everything stopping there, certainly not at the cost of 20-30 minutes on the running time. 2tph of fast services (calling MKC and one other only) is quite adequate to/from NMP, with at least one of those, preferably both, going north for connections.

 

[The Planner]

just a thought, post HS2 could they route all freight via Weedon and send all WCML passenger trains via Northampton?

Not without grade separating Hanslope. As Bletchleyite says, the time penalty is too great.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not without grade separating Hanslope. As Bletchleyite says, the time penalty is too great.

Even if you did grade separate Hanslope you'd still add 15-20 minutes to the running time plus time for the stop. Overall easier to stop more at Rugby timed for good connections, and of course they could go via MKC.

 

[VT 390]

Would it not make sense to terminate the Stoke-on-Trent service at Macclesfield so that there is less chance of it being delayed on the busy approaches to the Manchester station. I know that Stockport would loose it's direct HS2 service but it would be not much longer to change at Piccadilly and it will still have a 1tph through service operated by Pendolinos on the WCML.

 

[si404]

Would it not make sense to terminate the Stoke-on-Trent service at Macclesfield so that there is less chance of it being delayed on the busy approaches to the Manchester station.

That's the current official plan for post phase-2b service.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I don't see why you'd stop random Liverpools at Crewe rather than just one or both per hour "im Takt". Same with EM Hub.

Personally, I'd stop everything at Brum and Crewe for interchange.

I'd agree. And personally I'd hope that the actual timetable is a bit more 'regular' with more frequent trains having the same stopping patterns, and completely avoiding skip-stopping. If you end up with something close to 18tph having 18 different stopping patterns, then the timetable becomes confusing, and (perhaps more importantly) it becomes much harder to provide frequent trains at regular and predictable intervals between all the various HS2 destinations that might warrant them.

 

[Andrew1395]

Why would Milton Keynes justify more Inter city services on a recast WCML than Watford Junction. The latter is a regional hub that already generates 25% more journeys for the railway than Milton Keynes. Within the next 15 years SW Hertfordshire is to build more homes than Milton Keynes, and the M25 makes Watford Junction a better hub for the Home Counties for those not wanting to travel on HS2. I would think WFJ would generate more revenue than Milton Keynes for traditional Inter city services to Birmingham and the North West. As an aside what chance of more services via the West London line for commuting and leisure between Northampton - East Croydon

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why would Milton Keynes justify more Inter city services on a recast WCML than Watford Junction.

Because by the time HS2 is actually finished it'll have a population of about 350 to 400,000, roughly twice its present size? And demand will be increased by connections from East West Rail too?

But even so, if you'd like my opinion, I'd say that all classic line IC services should call at WFJ, MKC and Rugby once HS2 opens.

 

[VT 390]

Why would Milton Keynes justify more Inter city services on a recast WCML than Watford Junction. The latter is a regional hub that already generates 25% more journeys for the railway than Milton Keynes. Within the next 15 years SW Hertfordshire is to build more homes than Milton Keynes, and the M25 makes Watford Junction a better hub for the Home Counties for those not wanting to travel on HS2. I would think WFJ would generate more revenue than Milton Keynes for traditional Inter city services to Birmingham and the North West.

Why not alternate the calls between Milton Keynes Central and Watford Junction so that every service call at one or the other?

 

[Andrew1395]

Why not alternate the calls between Milton Keynes Central and Watford Junction so that every service call at one or the other?

Sounds a good plan to me. I assume all the post HS2 plans for WCML services is based on 125 mph and tilting Pendolino type of trains. Are Anglo Scottish sleepers to transfer permanently to ECML. I think there should also be consideration to run a 24 hour timetable from Milton Keynes into Euston, maybe 1TPH between 02.00 and 04.00 and a minimum half hourly either side of that.

 

[Andrew1395]

Because by the time HS2 is actually finished it'll have a population of about 350 to 400,000, roughly twice its present size? And demand will be increased by connections from East West Rail too?

But even so, if you'd like my opinion, I'd say that all classic line IC services should call at WFJ, MKC and Rugby once HS2 opens.

Watford (the smallest by area borough in England) will be 125,000 within five years, Hemel Hempstead similar as will St Albans. With the more dispersed settlements (Berkhamsted, Radlett, Rickmansworth, etc) adding a further 500,000 that's bigger than Milton Keynes and Bletchley. The London borough of Brent will have a bigger population than Milton Keynes. But I agree that all WCML IC services should stop Watford and Milton Keynes. Not so sure about Rugby. Mind you make the service too good and HS2 will be running around half empty