East Coast Eureka clockface timetable May 2011

[shinkansen1966]

Just read draft timetable for East Coast eureka clockface timetable
http://www.eastcoast.co.uk/Global/Eureka/PDFs/DraftEurekatimetable.pdf

A big improvment on the skip stop timetable we have at the moment. Leeds are the winners with a standard 2 hr 10 min journey time to London. Retford seems to loose, served with a 2 hrly London to York slow train.

Interesting to see Lincoln gets 2 hrly through service to London. Who will operate this and what rolling stock will be used ?

 

[Aictos]

East Coast are intending to run to York and Lincoln alternatively using 180s, Class 90s and Mk3s were proposed but I believe 180s are now preferred.

 

[ert47]

looks interesting, I hope the price of tickets don't drastically jump in prices =/

Travelling direct from Lincoln to St Pancres direct (via. Nottingham) already costs £57 with a railcard with EMT and £40 (LCN - NWD, bumps price up a tad) with East Coast changing at either Newark Northgate or Peterborough =/

 

[williamn]

Why is the first Edinburgh train not until 7am? On the west coast there is a 5.39am train to Glasgow, which when I was on it last was pretty well loaded.

 

[Lee_Again]

Why is the first Edinburgh train not until 7am? On the west coast there is a 5.39am train to Glasgow, which when I was on it last was pretty well loaded.

...And if you change at Carlisle, you'll get into Edinburgh before the 7am service from Kings Cross. Madness.

 

[Aictos]

Why is the first Edinburgh train not until 7am? On the west coast there is a 5.39am train to Glasgow, which when I was on it last was pretty well loaded.

No idea, could also ask why the first southbound East Coast doesn't arrive at Stevenage until about 10am during the weekday.

Also as much as I like to see the ECML journey times improve, I do think a lot will suffer just so Lord Adonis can have his sub 4 hour London to Edinburgh trains.

 

[tbtc]

...And if you change at Carlisle, you'll get into Edinburgh before the 7am service from Kings Cross. Madness.

Not really madness, just a reasonable use of resources.

There are a few trains from Yorkshire/ north east England that arrive well before the first London - Edinburgh train - the ECML isn't just about London...

If there was a five o'clock in the morning from London then people would be complaining about East Coast undercutting the sleeper...

 

[TheExmoorBeast]

East Coast are intending to run to York and Lincoln alternatively using 180s, Class 90s and Mk3s were proposed but I believe 180s are now preferred.

I'd quite like to know a class 90 & Mark 3 set would reach Lincoln as it isn't wired! Exceptionally long HT lead maybe?
BTW it is alternately, not alternatively!

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . Also as much as I like to see the ECML journey times improve, I do think a lot will suffer just so Lord Adonis can have his sub 4 hour London to Edinburgh trains.

That really concerns me too. I'm guessing there will be collateral damage, the loosers being local stopping services, Cross Country, Hull Trains, Grand Central and of course, freight paths

 

[tbtc]

That really concerns me too. I'm guessing there will be collateral damage, the loosers being local stopping services, Cross Country, Hull Trains, Grand Central and of course, freight paths

The London - Lincoln/ Hull becomes an additional "local stopper" which means the longer distance trains can be speeded up a little and stopping patterns simplified. Hull Trains/ GC have to fit into everyone else's patterns. A much simpler timetable

 

[Ticketsplease]

What about the 40 East Coast staff in Glasgow who are increasingly looking like being out of a job, when East Coast pull the plug on Glasgow?
Guards may have a job if they transfer to Edinburgh or Cross Country, but I fear for the catering crews.
All because the paths to Glasgow via Edinburgh will not fit in with "clock face" timetable.
Sorry but what a load of bollocks, more like Adonis trying to make the East Coast franchise attractive. To bad if you live in the West of Scotland and want a direct train service to anywhere on the East Coast beyond York.

 

[me123]

I would disagree, and I think that this timetable offers a more sensible approach to serving Glasgow. Glasgow-London via the ECML is pretty much not used, and Glasgow-Leeds is a potentially huge market that's not been tapped into yet. The relatively few people who want to go further south can change at Edinburgh, as is currently the case anyway for the majority of options!

There was never any need to send a whole rake of Mark IVs to Glasgow when a Voyager will suffice.

 

[tbtc]

What about the 40 East Coast staff in Glasgow who are increasingly looking like being out of a job, when East Coast pull the plug on Glasgow?
Guards may have a job if they transfer to Edinburgh or Cross Country, but I fear for the catering crews.
All because the paths to Glasgow via Edinburgh will not fit in with "clock face" timetable.
Sorry but what a load of bollocks, more like Adonis trying to make the East Coast franchise attractive. To bad if you live in the West of Scotland and want a direct train service to anywhere on the East Coast beyond York.

Nothing to do with "clockface" - its a total waste of a long 225 when a Sprinter would cope with most of the loadings from Glasgow, a 153 would cope with some of the loadings I've seen on that stretch. Better use the trains where they are needed, eh?

 

[whoshotjimmi]

What about the 40 East Coast staff in Glasgow who are increasingly looking like being out of a job, when East Coast pull the plug on Glasgow?
Guards may have a job if they transfer to Edinburgh or Cross Country, but I fear for the catering crews.
All because the paths to Glasgow via Edinburgh will not fit in with "clock face" timetable.
Sorry but what a load of bollocks, more like Adonis trying to make the East Coast franchise attractive. To bad if you live in the West of Scotland and want a direct train service to anywhere on the East Coast beyond York.

Meh. They will get over it. And i don't see what is so hard about changing onto a different train at Edinburgh for Glasgow. It's not like there is only 2 trains a day....

I kind of agree with the timetable in principle - what they have done is try to speed up services and simplify stopping patterns to improve reliability and journey time. EMT did something very similar with their Nottingham and Sheffield services and now use the Derby and Corby services as "stoppers".

Unfortunately, I do not think it goes far enough. The journey time between Leeds and London is still not comparable to the new Manchester - London timings. The journey time to Edinburgh is still 4+ hours. The ECML is known as the racetrack. Why not use it to its full potential?

As for early morning services to Edinburgh, I think it is scandalous that the first train out of London does not arrive in Edinburgh until after 11. If the government seriously wants rail to compete with domestic air travel, then that will have to change. Still, the report does state that it is incomplete and that some services are subject to change. Let's see if they rectify that unacceptable situation.

 

[DescendingSadly]

The ECML is going to become very crowded

 

[ashworth]

I would disagree, and I think that this timetable offers a more sensible approach to serving Glasgow. Glasgow-London via the ECML is pretty much not used, and Glasgow-Leeds is a potentially huge market that's not been tapped into yet. The relatively few people who want to go further south can change at Edinburgh, as is currently the case anyway for the majority of options!

There was never any need to send a whole rake of Mark IVs to Glasgow when a Voyager will suffice.

I agree that there is probably a huge market for pasengers travelling from Leeds to Glasgow, as there also probably is from Shefield and Nottingham. Why not therefore bring back fast services via Settle and Carlisle.

Perhaps I am just suffering from a dose of nostalgia or does it make sense?

 

[Aictos]

I'd quite like to know a class 90 & Mark 3 set would reach Lincoln as it isn't wired! Exceptionally long HT lead maybe?
BTW it is alternately, not alternatively!

Sorry meant York, there was talk of semi fast services being provided by such a set though, I think I got Leeds and Lincoln confused slightly though, my mistake.

 

[dk1]

Unfortunately, I do not think it goes far enough. The journey time between Leeds and London is still not comparable to the new Manchester - London timings.

Dont understand that comment. Standard Manchester to Euston varies 2h07-2h09 with a fast 07.00 taking 1h58. Leeds to Kings Cross will be 2h10-2h13 with a fast 06.45 taking 1h59.

 

[yorksrob]

I see that yet again the Wakefield stop will be missed out on the last train from London to Leeds. A clockface timetable is all very well but of little use if you can't get back from a day out at a reasonable time

 

[shinkansen1966]

I do think a lot will suffer just so Lord Adonis can have his sub 4 hour London to Edinburgh trains.

Fear not. By the time the ECML franchise is re-let, both Adonis and his sub 4 hr plan will be long since forgotten. Anything the govt says about the railways are empty gesture politics. They want to say things which get them re-elected. Same goes for the Tories.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
"I kind of agree with the timetable in principle - what they have done is try to speed up services and simplify stopping patterns to improve reliability and journey time. EMT did something very similar with their Nottingham and Sheffield services and now use the Derby and Corby services as 'stoppers'."

And look what's happened on the MML over the last 10 years since the fast/slow clockface was introduced. Passengers numbers are up, up, up !! Better to have busy trains than congested roads.

You see taktfahrplans in Switzerland, Germany and elsehwhere. They're user friendly and easy to remember. And that's how the railways should be. Now let's make those fares and brands easy to remember.

 

[blacknight]

Nothing to do with "clockface" - its a total waste of a long 225 when a Sprinter would cope with most of the loadings from Glasgow, a 153 would cope with some of the loadings I've seen on that stretch. Better use the trains where they are needed, eh?

Dito for the through service to Lincoln total waste of a Northbound path great if your one of the 30 odd passengers going to Lincoln but no use if going north of Newark.
What is needed is an intigrated connecting service for Lincoln, make more use of the hourly Retford service if EMT dont co-operated at Newark.

 

[shinkansen1966]

Dito for the through service to Lincoln total waste of a Northbound path great if your one of the 30 odd passengers going to Lincoln but no use if going north of Newark.

Suspect direct train service to Lincoln is a politcal move. There are nearly alway votes in new train services.

 

[whoshotjimmi]

Suspect direct train service to Lincoln is a politcal move. There are nearly alway votes in new train services.

Political or not, Lincoln is a very isolated city with a very poor transport structure - No motorways & poor rail services. It is about time Lincoln got a little bit of something.

 

[Aictos]

Political or not, Lincoln is a very isolated city with a very poor transport structure - No motorways & poor rail services. It is about time Lincoln got a little bit of something.

I agree and with the onboard route maps on the East Coast services indicating a potential route to Cleethorpes, could the service be extended in the summer to Cleethorpes or extend the Lincolns to Skegness in the summer?

 

[MCR247]

I kind of agree with the timetable in principle - what they have done is try to speed up services and simplify stopping patterns to improve reliability and journey time. EMT did something very similar with their Nottingham and Sheffield services and now use the Derby and Corby services as "stoppers".

They nottingham and Corby trains as stoppers. The nottingham fast was slowed down to call at Market Harborough

 

[Ticketsplease]

Meh. They will get over it. And i don't see what is so hard about changing onto a different train at Edinburgh for Glasgow. It's not like there is only 2 trains a day....

I kind of agree with the timetable in principle - what they have done is try to speed up services and simplify stopping patterns to improve reliability and journey time. EMT did something very similar with their Nottingham and Sheffield services and now use the Derby and Corby services as "stoppers".

Unfortunately, I do not think it goes far enough. The journey time between Leeds and London is still not comparable to the new Manchester - London timings. The journey time to Edinburgh is still 4+ hours. The ECML is known as the racetrack. Why not use it to its full potential?

As for early morning services to Edinburgh, I think it is scandalous that the first train out of London does not arrive in Edinburgh until after 11. If the government seriously wants rail to compete with domestic air travel, then that will have to change. Still, the report does state that it is incomplete and that some services are subject to change. Let's see if they rectify that unacceptable situation.

"They will get over it" How dare you! Are you going to pay the mortgages of these people as "they are getting over it" I dont think so. This is peoples lives we are talking about. The Glasgow depot has at least 3 households with at least 2 earners who may be out of a job. It is quite clear that you have no consideration for peoples livelihoods.
You also seem to miss the fact that this proposal is a cut in services from the West of Scotland. Glasgow via Motherwell currently has 8 East Coast services to London. Virgin only has 3 services a day that stop at Motherwell to London. Cross Country currently only run 3 trains a day from Glasgow via the East Coast line to Leeds and Sheffield.
The new time table proposes 1 East Coast service a day in and out of Glasgow to London, 5 Virgin services to stop at Motherwell a day to London and Cross Country to run 8 services a day via Motherwell to Leeds/Sheffield.
You dont have to be a mathematician to see that Motherwell passengers are going to be the big losers here. They are also going to loose one of one of busiest Scottish commuter trains, with the 07.50 service from Glasgow missing from the new Timetable. How will the 200 passengers who travel daily, now get to there work?
Its high time that the traveling public who use the services on a daily basis were listened to.
I would also like to say that in principal I have no objection to opening up new markets with more frequent direct services to Leeds/Sheffield, providing that the current level of service is not affected. Staff should not loose there jobs, in order to make a franchise look good for the next money grabbing quangos.

 

[tbtc]

How will the 200 passengers who travel daily, now get to there work?

200? Seriously? Still a massive waste of a nine coach train.

Bear in mind there are now two trains an hour from Belshill to Edinburgh, as part of the revamped Shotts line service...

 

[Lee_Again]

Not really madness, just a reasonable use of resources.

There are a few trains from Yorkshire/ north east England that arrive well before the first London - Edinburgh train - the ECML isn't just about London...

If there was a five o'clock in the morning from London then people would be complaining about East Coast undercutting the sleeper...

The fact that the WCML gets to Edinburgh first is because it realises there's a market. As I have said on this forum many times, the trains must be able to compete with the airlines, and to do that you must be able to reach London/Edinburgh and return the same day.

The sleeper argument is not valid. It caters for a specific market and early trains wouldn't affect this (not 100% anyway). Virgin already has an arrival in Euston for 9(ish). Not everyone, though, wants to catch a train at 4.30 in the morning. That's assuming they can get to Glasgow for that time.

 

[tbtc]

The fact that the WCML gets to Edinburgh first is because it realises there's a market. As I have said on this forum many times, the trains must be able to compete with the airlines, and to do that you must be able to reach London/Edinburgh and return the same day.

The sleeper argument is not valid. It caters for a specific market and early trains wouldn't affect this (not 100% anyway). Virgin already has an arrival in Euston for 9(ish). Not everyone, though, wants to catch a train at 4.30 in the morning. That's assuming they can get to Glasgow for that time.

...and similarly assuming people can get to central London for five in the morning to make the trip north...

 

[Waverley125]

personally I'm not such a fan of this plan. I think removing the KGX-Glasgow Central service is probably a good idea, as it provides a much slower link Edinburgh-Glasgow than the Queen Street service and is much slower London-Glasgow.

Personally I'd like to see a clockface timetable along these lines:

xx00-Edinburgh Waverley (Peterborough, Grantham, Doncaster, York, Darlington, Durham, Newcastle, Morpeth, Berwick upon Tweed)

xx10-Leeds (Stevenage, Peterborough, Grantham, Newark NG, Retford, Doncaster, Wakefield WG)

xx20-Sunderland (Peterborough, York, Thirsk, Northallerton, Middlesbrough, Hartlepool)

OR

xx20-Cleethorpes (Stevenage, Peterborough, Spalding, Sleaford, Lincoln, Market Rasen, Grimsby)

xx30-Harrogate (Peterborough, Grantham, Doncaster, Wakefield WGate, Leeds, Horsforth)

OR

xx30-Aberdeen (Peterborough, York, Newcastle, Edinburgh, Inverkeithing, Kirkcaldy, Leuchars, Dundee, Arbroath, Montrose)

xx40-Newcastle (Stevenage, Peterborough, Grantham, Newark NG, Retford, Doncaster, York, Northallerton, Darlington, Durham, Chester le Street)

xx50-Bradford F Square (Doncaster, Leeds, Shipley)