Should XC's via Doncaster trains run via Leeds instead?

[Glenn1969]

Maybe they should let XC run via Leeds more than once per hour? Think they want to but the DfT won't let them. It would certainly alleviate overcrowding on the current service

 

[EM2]

Maybe they should let XC run via Leeds more than once per hour? Think they want to but the DfT won't let them. It would certainly alleviate overcrowding on the current service

Good luck finding paths through Leeds to do it.

 

[Captain Bigwig]

Good luck finding paths through Leeds to do it.

If we built a new line to Leeds that might free up some paths. There'd probably be room for some new platforms just south of the existing station.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

If we built a new line to Leeds that might free up some paths. There'd probably be room for some new platforms just south of the existing station.

The new line is called HS2.

 

[Captain Bigwig]

The new line is called HS2.

Exactly.

What I'm saying is that post-HS2 there might (hopefully) be a chance to fit a few more Cross Country trains through Leeds.

 

[EM2]

If we built a new line to Leeds that might free up some paths. There'd probably be room for some new platforms just south of the existing station.

Like a High Speed line, you mean?

 

[yorkie]

Maybe they should let XC run via Leeds more than once per hour? Think they want to but the DfT won't let them. It would certainly alleviate overcrowding on the current service

XC do want to do this, but it would be an unpopular move. They want to do it because they want to get their hands on increased revenue.

But it would deny easy access to the XC network for many passengers who can currently change at Doncaster, as well as increasing journey times and decrease reliability.

I am opposed to it, and the DfT are quite right to require XC to operate an hourly service via Doncaster.

It's bad enough that some peak services go via Leeds and not via Doncaster (causing great inconvenience and a 30 minute time penalty) without any more going via the slow route!

 

[Glenn1969]

Think it would be a popular move in Leeds and West Yorkshire. IMHO a one train per hour XC service is inadequate for the size of the market.

 

[yorkie]

Think it would be a popular move in Leeds and West Yorkshire. IMHO a one train per hour XC service is inadequate for the size of the market.

Yes it would be a popular move in Leeds, but it would be very unpopular among residents of Doncaster, Selby, Hull, Cleethorpes, Scunthorpe and various other places that can currently change at Doncaster.

The extended journey times would be unpopular for anyone who is travelling via York & Sheffield and all stations beyond.

Going via Leeds adds half an hour to the journey and also increases the risk of delay due to congestion.

It would be like the tail wagging the dog.

 

[Glenn1969]

Most of those places could still access XC with one change at Sheffield rather than Doncaster

3 XC trains from Yorkshire per hour would be better- if only there was room for them

 

[yorkie]

Until we get HS2, there isn't.

In the mean time I suggest XC be required to lengthen their trains, but I can't see that happening any time soon either!

 

[30907]

I would prefer XC to operate 1tph Scotland via Doncaster and 1 terminating Leeds or York, leaving Leeds - Newcastle - Scotland to TPE. This would balance the loadings better.
Against that a slight reduction of competition, and XC would lose revenue.
It's ironic BTW that Doncaster only gained XC services to get them off the Pontefract route - not saying it was a bad thing though

 

[tbtc]

Good luck finding paths through Leeds to do it.

I agree it'll be difficult.

Additional paths (between Leeds and York) have been found for TPE and Northern - whilst having four trains per hour from York to Manchester is impressive, it seems that trans-pennine capacity is more important to The Powers That Be than cross-country capacity.

It'll be a long wait for the eastern bit of HS2 to come in to operation. In the meantime a path has been found for an hourly Sheffield - Wakefield Westgate - Leeds service, just one run by two coach 195s rather than Voyagers.

Yes it would be a popular move in Leeds, but it would be very unpopular among residents of Doncaster, Selby, Hull, Cleethorpes, Scunthorpe and various other places that can currently change at Doncaster

Hull, Cleethorpes and Scunthorpe have regular semi-fast services to Sheffield - the trains that people of Hull, Cleethorpes and Scunthorpe would be getting to Doncaster (to change onto an hourly XC service towards Birmingham) are the same ones that they could sit on to Sheffield (to change to a half hourly XC service towards Birmingham) if XC were permitted to divert all services via Leeds.

Plus, the proposed changes that LNER inherited from VTEC mean an increase in services from Doncaster to York/ Newcastle, so less need for XC to fill that gap once the 800/801s arrive.

 

[ainsworth74]

Plus, the proposed changes that LNER inherited from VTEC mean an increase in services from Doncaster to York/ Newcastle, so less need for XC to fill that gap once the 800/801s arrive.

This might be heresy but, assuming the TPE and LNER enhancements come off, I'm increasingly of the view that one of the XC services per hour up the ECML should terminate at York. I would propose the current Newcastle terminator personally. There should be more than enough capacity between York and Newcastle provided by TPE, LNER and the remaining XC service and you then have to travel to south of Birmingham until you find a station that loses a direct link to Newcastle as a result of that change. But it does free back up some capacity on the ECML north of York (which is an increasingly crowded railway), reduces demand on XC's fleet (it's a two hour round trip with lay over time in the middle!) and probably helps strengthen resilience as it avoids XC services potentially either importing delays onto the ECML or delayed being exported from the ECML.

But like I say, I realise that this is close to heresy so I'll retreat to my bunker to ride out the storm...

 

[swt_passenger]

How about sending the proposed ‘spare’ XC service somewhere different north of York, eg to Middlesbrough or Scarborough?

 

[gordonthemoron]

they should revert to using the direct line between York and Sheffield, skipping both Leeds and Doncaster

 

[ainsworth74]

How about sending the proposed ‘spare’ XC service somewhere different north of York, eg to Middlesbrough or Scarborough?

Well that was my other thought I must admit! Or if you wanted to be really radical hang a right after Doncaster and go to Hull!

 

[swt_passenger]

Well that was my other thought I must admit! Or if you wanted to be really radical hang a right after Doncaster and go to Hull!

Southampton to Hull has appeared in a route study that I’ve seen. Possibly for post-HS2? I guess some ideas aren’t actually that radical...

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Southampton to Hull has appeared in a route study that I’ve seen. Possibly for post-HS2? I guess some ideas aren’t actually that radical...

Yes that was suggested in a study. Possibly because only one CrossCountry train can fit north of Yorkpost-HS2 so the Newcastle service should be diverted to Hull post-HS2.

 

[yorksrob]

This might be heresy but, assuming the TPE and LNER enhancements come off, I'm increasingly of the view that one of the XC services per hour up the ECML should terminate at York. I would propose the current Newcastle terminator personally. There should be more than enough capacity between York and Newcastle provided by TPE, LNER and the remaining XC service and you then have to travel to south of Birmingham until you find a station that loses a direct link to Newcastle as a result of that change. But it does free back up some capacity on the ECML north of York (which is an increasingly crowded railway), reduces demand on XC's fleet (it's a two hour round trip with lay over time in the middle!) and probably helps strengthen resilience as it avoids XC services potentially either importing delays onto the ECML or delayed being exported from the ECML.

But like I say, I realise that this is close to heresy so I'll retreat to my bunker to ride out the storm...

You could send the odd one to Scarborough !

 

[VT 390]

Until HS2 opens at least one service should run via Doncaster so that the Journey time from stations between Newcastle and York is not longer than it needs to be (as it is via Leeds) and I think that once TPE introduce their Liverpool-Leeds-Edinburgh service the Doncaster XC service should run to Scotland as this would offer a more competitive journey time from Edinburgh to Birmingham compared to the 2 hourly WCML service, also as the Leeds service is generally busier it may free up some capacity on board for longer distance passengers.
After HS2 1tph should be more than enough for Leeds as the HS2 services will be far quicker with the only Birmingham passengers using it north of Sheffield from Wakefield, for this reason after HS2 I would have the Leeds service run through to Edinburgh (as it is at present as the HS2 Edinburgh to Birmingham services via the WCML would be quicker than any ECML XC service) and the other service run as it is at present up to Doncaster and then run fast to Hull.

 

[xotGD]

To increase XC capacity through Leeds, just operate sensible length trains. One train per hour to Derby and beyond is fair enough.

 

[VT 390]

To increase XC capacity through Leeds, just operate sensible length trains. One train per hour to Derby and beyond is fair enough.

Could all the XC services via Leeds be operated by HST's as there should be plenty available soon (at least until XC order new stock).

 

[tbtc]

This might be heresy but, assuming the TPE and LNER enhancements come off, I'm increasingly of the view that one of the XC services per hour up the ECML should terminate at York. I would propose the current Newcastle terminator personally. There should be more than enough capacity between York and Newcastle provided by TPE, LNER and the remaining XC service and you then have to travel to south of Birmingham until you find a station that loses a direct link to Newcastle as a result of that change. But it does free back up some capacity on the ECML north of York (which is an increasingly crowded railway), reduces demand on XC's fleet (it's a two hour round trip with lay over time in the middle!) and probably helps strengthen resilience as it avoids XC services potentially either importing delays onto the ECML or delayed being exported from the ECML.

But like I say, I realise that this is close to heresy so I'll retreat to my bunker to ride out the storm...

I agree with you.

Given limited paths we should be running the longer trains on each line.

On the ECML north of York that means five/nine coach 801/802s rather than four/five car Voyagers.

On the Sheffield - Wakefield Westgate - Leeds line that means four/five car Voyagers rather than two/three coach 195s.

(I'm only surprised that someone hasn't suggested diverting the XC service from Plymouth/Birmingham/Leeds to Glasgow via Settle and Carlisle instead of via York/ Newcastle/ Edinburgh!)

they should revert to using the direct line between York and Sheffield, skipping both Leeds and Doncaster

Why?

So that it takes just as long (given the speed restrictions through Pontefract) without serving anywhere large?

 

[SoccerHQ]

Good question. In two minds tbh.

I agree with poster above, if you're heading up to York or even North east from Midlands then via Donny is much preferable for quicker journey time (would be even more fast without the lag time at Donny waiting for the London train to come in and depart) and also the carriages are generally quieter than via Leeds unless there's racing on at Donny and York.

However of course at peak times just having one fast train from Leeds to Sheffield is frustrating. That said they do fit an extra train in at I think 16.40 and also there is a 7 coach train that *usually* turns up for one of the peak services so it could be worse.

TBH I've always felt a decent hourly stopper would solve things. I know we have two already but the one via Castleford is snail pace and no use if you want to get to Sheffield quickly. I was thinking many one starting at York that goes York-Leeds-Wakefield-Meadowhall-Chesterfield and then finishes up at Derby or Leicester, complements the Nottingham service although wouldn't route it via Barnsley.

 

[Glenn1969]

Semi fast York- Garforth- Leeds- Wakefield- Moorthorpe- Swinton- Meadowhall- Sheffield- Dronfield- Chesterfield- Belper- Derby?

Northern Connect service to complement the Nottingham service and provide links to Meadowhall from more stations?

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Reading a previous point that I agree with:

- The service via Leeds to terminate at Leeds, with passengers on the Leeds > Scotland axis transferred onto TransPennine.
- The service via Doncaster increased to 8/9/10 coaches forward to Scotland and starting at Bournemouth.
- Leeds services formed of 4/5 coaches and starting at Bristol.
- Plymouth services formed of 8/9/10 coaches and running through to Manchester Picc.
- Southampton/Reading trains formed of 4/5 coaches and terminating at New Street.
- 8/12 Class 350 operating Birmingham Intl / New Street - Piccadilly as a ‘capacity buster’ with some additional calls.

 

[Glenn1969]

Except that Transpennine trains are already rammed with people going Manchester-Huddersfield-Leeds-York

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Except that Transpennine trains are already rammed with people going Manchester-Huddersfield-Leeds-York

A small quantity of joined-up thinking and yield management would allow those lovely, long loco-hauled jobs to Middlesbrough and Scarborough to pick up the physical Manchester - Leeds - York traffic, keeping 185s / 802s clear on the Newcastle and Edinburgh trips for Leeds passengers.

 

[Glenn1969]

Most trains are currently full. In the peaks that applies to Calder Valley and Transpennine Main from Manchester to Leeds and York. More capacity is needed not just moving round existing bits to try and fit a square peg into a round hole. I also maintain that an hourly service West Yorkshire- Sheffield- Derby/Birmingham is inadequate most of the day for the size of the market.