LNR new WCML timetable, May 2019 (in open data feeds)

[RealTrains07]

Regarding train coaches

Are LNR london to liverpool, 8 coaches all the way through or are they gonna be 4 coaches??

Thats what iam wondering cause concern is that LNR wont have enough trains

 

[RealTrains07]

I thought that was what is happening, with the Euston to Crewe service running non stop from Stafford to Crewe to maintain 1tph between Stafford and Crewe via Stoke-on-Trent one of the Euston to Birmingham services will extend to Crewe via Stoke.

LNR are extending 1 birmingham service to crewe via stoke every hour however their is meant to be a new WMR service being introduced alongside it

 

[Idon'tKnow]

LNR are extending 1 birmingham service to crewe via stoke every hour however their is meant to be a new WMR service being introduced alongside it

I don't think there are any plans for wmtrains to introduce a second hourly services between Stafford, Stoke & Crewe. From what I can gather, the original plan was for one WMR service per hour between Crewe and Birmingham via Stoke, however people were not happy with having their London service withdrawn, so the Birmingham service will extend to London Euston via Northampton, which will be operated under the LNR brand.

 

[RealTrains07]

I don't think there are any plans for wmtrains to introduce a second hourly services between Stafford, Stoke & Crewe. From what I can gather, the original plan was for one WMR service per hour between Crewe and Birmingham via Stoke, however people were not happy with having their London service withdrawn, so the Birmingham service will extend to London Euston via Northampton, which will be operated under the LNR brand.

Well why stone has WMR branding makes no sense then considering what the train companies said about the timetable

 

[sufian123]

Well why stone has WMR branding makes no sense then considering what the train companies said about the timetable

Sunday’s only going to be WMR operation. Rest of the week is mainly LNR.

 

[43074]

LNR are extending 1 birmingham service to crewe via stoke every hour however their is meant to be a new WMR service being introduced alongside it

Ignore the branding, the only services via Stone will be the Crewe to Birmingham via Stoke service, which in most hours happens to run to/from Euston. Stone and stations via Stoke-on-Trent will be getting no more than 1 train per hour.

 

[RealTrains07]

Ignore the branding, the only services via Stone will be the Crewe to Birmingham via Stoke service, which in most hours happens to run to/from Euston. Stone and stations via Stoke-on-Trent will be getting no more than 1 train per hour.

Ah well, annoying considering stone is the only station via stoke which has 1 tph

This timetable is disappointing for me

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ah well, annoying considering stone is the only station via stoke which has 1 tph

This timetable is disappointing for me

No station that way has more than 1tph of LNR. There is going to be no change to other operators' services. The only difference is that the service will run to Euston via Birmingham and Northampton rather than down the Trent Valley.

 

[Idon'tKnow]

Longport gets just the one EMT service per hour so stone isn't the only one.

Ah well, annoying considering stone is the only station via stoke which has 1 tph

This timetable is disappointing for me

Longport gets just the one EMT service per hour so stone isn't the only one. When it reopens, I imagine Barlaston will also just have one train per hour too.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Regarding train coaches
Are LNR london to liverpool, 8 coaches all the way through or are they gonna be 4 coaches??
Thats what iam wondering cause concern is that LNR wont have enough trains

I think the aim is to have 8-car south of Birmingham.
Formed by attaching a Rugeley portion to a Liverpool service (or similar).
Unlikely to be 8-car all the way to Liverpool as most platforms are not long enough.

 

[RealTrains07]

Cant see barlaston opening again anytime soon
its not unreasonable to have an WMR service as well or instead of the LNR one

Longport gets just the one EMT service per hour so stone isn't the only one.

Longport gets just the one EMT service per hour so stone isn't the only one. When it reopens, I imagine Barlaston will also just have one train per hour too.

 

[The Planner]

Where is your second train going and where does it fit?

 

[sd0733]

Ah well, annoying considering stone is the only station via stoke which has 1 tph

This timetable is disappointing for me

It was always going to be like it is via Stoke there was never any mention of a second train via the loop.

-Firstly there is barely any demand for more trains, units, crews and scarce paths are all tied up on busier services.
- Pathing wise would be incredibly difficult to find a path that fits over the single line between Crewe and alsager, over the very slow crossing at Kidsgrove and onto the mainline to Stone then across another slow crossover and finally through Norton Bridge into Stafford. Then there are precious few paths on either the Wolverhampton or Trent routes so nowhere to continue to any way. Everywhere wants more trains but it is a very congested network and isnt as simple as just running when everyone wants.
- Also Units, there arent presently enough units to get the main trent services to 8 cars, this should be a priority to put the 10 Tpe units to work before any theoretical thoughts about an extra stoke train. Massively more people would benefit.

Like anything in life there are compromises and with the paths and units available for now the new timetable with its flaws and inconsistencies is about as good as its going to get for a good few year's probably until a massive recast when part of HS2 opens.

 

[43074]

Cant see barlaston opening again anytime soon
its not unreasonable to have an WMR service as well or instead of the LNR one

They're both the same company, there always was only going to be 1tph provided by the West Midlands franchisee.

 

[RealTrains07]

It was always going to be like it is via Stoke there was never any mention of a second train via the loop.

-Firstly there is barely any demand for more trains, units, crews and scarce paths are all tied up on busier services.
- Pathing wise would be incredibly difficult to find a path that fits over the single line between Crewe and alsager, over the very slow crossing at Kidsgrove and onto the mainline to Stone then across another slow crossover and finally through Norton Bridge into Stafford. Then there are precious few paths on either the Wolverhampton or Trent routes so nowhere to continue to any way. Everywhere wants more trains but it is a very congested network and isnt as simple as just running when everyone wants.
- Also Units, there arent presently enough units to get the main trent services to 8 cars, this should be a priority to put the 10 Tpe units to work before any theoretical thoughts about an extra stoke train. Massively more people would benefit.

Like anything in life there are compromises and with the paths and units available for now the new timetable with its flaws and inconsistencies is about as good as its going to get for a good few year's probably until a massive recast when part of HS2 opens.

I get what your saying, and fair enough but,

Unit availability - never been a need for a 2nd 350 service for the stoke route as 172s or 323s for example, should be added alongside or could even replace the 350 service currently on the line freeing 350s for other routes
(this being just a theory obviously) Giving you a 2tph by WMR from birmingham

Again obviously this doesnt take into account route congestion on the stafford to wolves line but timetable wise it could have the possibility to work??

(I mean, would that be a slightly better solution then having a london service going through to crewe when the unit could be used elsewhere?)

Pathing - understandable considering 2 trains run on the track between crewe and alsager every hour.
(But iam sure their is the possibility of a 3rd if timetabled correctly in the future)

Demand - considering their was demand for a london service to be retained on the stoke route, some high demand is their for trains?

 

[RealTrains07]

They're both the same company, there always was only going to be 1tph provided by the West Midlands franchisee.

Thats the issue with 1 franchise being split into 2 companies, they get mixed up and confused. When really they should be seperate enterties

Their should have never been a london service on the stoke line after the new timetable. That way it would have been easier

 

[sd0733]

I get what your saying, and fair enough but,

Unit availability - never been a need for a 2nd 350 service for the stoke route as 172s or 323s for example, should be added alongside or could even replace the 350 service currently on the line freeing 350s for other routes
(this being just a theory obviously) Giving you a 2tph by WMR from birmingham

Again obviously this doesnt take into account route congestion on the stafford to wolves line but timetable wise it could have the possibility to work??

(I mean, would that be a slightly better solution then having a london service going through to crewe when the unit could be used elsewhere?)

Pathing - understandable considering 2 trains run on the track between crewe and alsager every hour.
(But iam sure their is the possibility of a 3rd if timetabled correctly in the future)

Demand - considering their was demand for a london service to be retained on the stoke route, some high demand is their for trains?

With regards to units as it stands it has to be 350s on the line via Stoke. No traincrew that sign via Stoke sign 323s or 172s. Also there arent any of those units spare either.
Im sure there is a path somewhere for all of it but getting it theough all of the bottlenecks without sitting at them for ages is easier said than done.
The fact it goes to London is in effect irrelevant to its operation, it is essentially a Crewe-birmingham, birmingham-northampton and northampton-euston all joined up both for operational and through journey convenience. Even it was a standalone Crewe-brum in all likelihood it would run in the same path with the same unit

 

[RealTrains07]

With regards to units as it stands it has to be 350s on the line via Stoke. No traincrew that sign via Stoke sign 323s or 172s. Also there arent any of those units spare either.
Im sure there is a path somewhere for all of it but getting it theough all of the bottlenecks without sitting at them for ages is easier said than done.
The fact it goes to London is in effect irrelevant to its operation, it is essentially a Crewe-birmingham, birmingham-northampton and northampton-euston all joined up both for operational and through journey convenience. Even it was a standalone Crewe-brum in all likelihood it would run in the same path with the same unit

I agree, however whether it will be a 323 or 172 that runs the sunday services on the stoke loop with on the new timetable is yet to be know

I presume it will be 323 considering the fact the route is electrified

 

[causton]

I agree, however whether it will be a 323 or 172 that runs the sunday services on the stoke loop with on the new timetable is yet to be know

I presume it will be 323 considering the fact the route is electrified

Not sure where you are getting any of this from to be honest.

I have looked at the May diagrams and they are for 350/1 units for the Birmingham - Stoke - Crewe services on Sundays.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not sure where you are getting any of this from to be honest.

I have looked at the May diagrams and they are for 350/1 units for the Birmingham - Stoke - Crewe services on Sundays.

Extra prize if you spot a 350/2 on the first day, and an extra special one if the first unit is a /2.

 

[causton]

Extra prize if you spot a 350/2 on the first day, and an extra special one if the first unit is a /2.

I said what the diagrams were for, not what will actually turn up!!!

 

[sd0733]

I agree, however whether it will be a 323 or 172 that runs the sunday services on the stoke loop with on the new timetable is yet to be know

I presume it will be 323 considering the fact the route is electrified

Itll 100% certain not be a 172 or a 323 on any day. As i said before the depots who sign the route via Stoke dont sign the traction and crews with traction knowledge of 323s or 172s dont sign the route

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I suppose there might be a case to extend the Manchester-Stoke local to Birmingham via Stafford and perhaps Rugeley.
That way you are only adding a Stoke-Rugeley leg to existing paths.
But that crosses franchise and transport planning boundaries so is unlikely to make the cut.
The still-awaited Birmingham-Preston semi-fast is in the same boat.
A Manchester-Birmingham local did run in BR days (via Wolverhampton).

 

[RealTrains07]

Not sure where you are getting any of this from to be honest.

I have looked at the May diagrams and they are for 350/1 units for the Birmingham - Stoke - Crewe services on Sundays.

Well why is stone station WMR branding if no WMR trains stop there?!?
I have heard contradictory information both from people here and from LNR and WMR staff on whether its WMR or LNR trains stopping on sundays or just at stone in general. Bit of a mess tbh

 

[sd0733]

Well why is stone station WMR branding if no WMR trains stop there?!?
I have heard contradictory information both from people here and from LNR and WMR staff on whether its WMR or LNR trains stopping on sundays or just at stone in general. Bit of a mess tbh

To be honest as it stands it makes no differenfe if its WMR or LNR we work trains for both side's amd a lot of the fleets (150/153/350) all work for both sides. I agree its a bit of a mess currently but i wouldnt read into who operates what or any station branding at this point

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I suppose there might be a case to extend the Manchester-Stoke local to Birmingham via Stafford and perhaps Rugeley.
That way you are only adding a Stoke-Rugeley leg to existing paths.
But that crosses franchise and transport planning boundaries so is unlikely to make the cut.
The still-awaited Birmingham-Preston semi-fast is in the same boat.
A Manchester-Birmingham local did run in BR days (via Wolverhampton).

Not sure Colwich Junction or Shugborough could tolerate an additional tph, although that would be a nice service to have.

 

[sd0733]

I suppose there might be a case to extend the Manchester-Stoke local to Birmingham via Stafford and perhaps Rugeley.
That way you are only adding a Stoke-Rugeley leg to existing paths.
But that crosses franchise and transport planning boundaries so is unlikely to make the cut.
The still-awaited Birmingham-Preston semi-fast is in the same boat.
A Manchester-Birmingham local did run in BR days (via Wolverhampton).

Going to Rugeley would be a struggle, not only would it need to thread through Norton Bridgr and colwich but also cross across the entire layout at Rugeley

 

[RealTrains07]

To be honest as it stands it makes no differenfe if its WMR or LNR we work trains for both side's amd a lot of the fleets (150/153/350) all work for both sides. I agree its a bit of a mess currently but i wouldnt read into who operates what or any station branding at this point

Its just unessarily messy and confusing, i wish WM trains were a bit more organised in having 2 brands cause its probs gonna be worse when the franchise ends and WMR becomes property of the west midlands.

people are saying contradicting information about the timetable and i honestly dont know what to believe anymore

 

[RealTrains07]

Going to Rugeley would be a struggle, not only would it need to thread through Norton Bridgr and colwich but also cross across the entire layout at Rugeley

Would that even be possible considering Rugeley has an upper level like tamworth?

 

[matt]

Would that even be possible considering Rugeley has an upper level like tamworth?

No it doesn't.