Which company would you think will takeover the Liverpool-Nottingham Section of EMR Regional's Liverpool-Manchester-Nottingham-Norwich Route?

[Stephen Lee]

I know that another TOC will takeover the Liverpool-Manchester-Nottingham Route but which company has the biggest possibility of taking over it?

 

[thealm]

I know that another TOC will takeover the Liverpool-Manchester-Nottingham Route but which company has the biggest possibility of taking over it?

TransPennine Express as the will have excess Class 185's coming off lease soon. So they can use those to save another TOC taking on extra traction and to keep Class 185 in house at TPE.

 

[Purple Orange]

Presumably run as 6 car trains, should the 185s be used?

 

[tetudo boy]

CrossCountry seems like an appropriate operator to run the service. Why would TPE run the service?

 

[Purple Orange]

CrossCountry seems like an appropriate operator to run the service. Why would TPE run the service?

I’d say because Liverpool-Nottingham pivots on Manchester, which is central to TPE operations, whereas XC pivots on Brum and is central to their operations.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

CrossCountry seems like an appropriate operator to run the service. Why would TPE run the service?

Options are TPE and Northern. CrossCountry all run via Birmingham so would seem out of place. TPE seems logically as it already runs most of its service via Manchester and already runs one fast service via Hope Valley so makes sense to run the other.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

I’d say because Liverpool-Nottingham pivots on Manchester, which is central to TPE operations, whereas XC pivots on Brum and is central to their operations.

beat me to it

 

[Aictos]

CrossCountry seems like an appropriate operator to run the service. Why would TPE run the service?

If Cross Country seem to be considered then why not Northern as 1. Nottingham to Liverpool looks like a prime candidate to be considered as a Connect service and 2. They already run a similar service to Leeds.

The only thing in TPE's favour is the Class 185s but they can easily be cascaded or leased to other TOCs to provide the traction for the service, it shouldn't mean because they are currently operated by TPE that they will always be operated by them.

 

[Purple Orange]

Also TPE have a far superior passenger offering than XC in my opinion. I’d sooner be on one of their trains than a Voyager.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

If Cross Country seem to be considered then why not Northern as 1. Nottingham to Liverpool looks like a prime candidate to be considered as a Connect service and 2. They already run a similar service to Leeds.

The only thing in TPE's favour is the Class 185s but they can easily be cascaded or leased to other TOCs to provide the traction for the service, it shouldn't mean because they are currently operated by TPE that they will always be operated by them.

TPE not only has the 185s but also runs many express services including one to Cleethorpes which also runs via the Hope valley

 

[Domh245]

There is also the option of the service remaining with EMR, but operating with the split

 

[Purple Orange]

There is also the option of the service remaining with EMR, but operating with the split

In fact remaining with EMR would be preferential to it going XC.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Also TPE have a far superior passenger offering than XC in my opinion. I’d sooner be on one of their trains than a Voyager.

I don't overly care about Voyagers, but XC is dire. They should improve their existing services before getting any extra ones.

 

[Purple Orange]

I don't overly care about Voyagers, but XC is dire. They should improve their existing services before getting any extra ones.

I’d take services off them if it was down to me.

 

[Ianno87]

Options are TPE and Northern. CrossCountry all run via Birmingham so would seem out of place. TPE seems logically as it already runs most of its service via Manchester and already runs one fast service via Hope Valley so makes sense to run the other.

TPE gives one (fast) operator Manchester-Sheffield, but Northern would give one operator via Warrington Central, and also one operator (most of the day) Sheffield-Nottingham.

Either would be reasonably rational.

TPE seems "obvious" with 185s coming available, but no reason why they couldn't be sub-leased to Northern.

 

[backontrack]

There is also the option of the service remaining with EMR, but operating with the split

I think this might happen, though I could be wrong of course.

 

[Purple Orange]

I think part of the argument for TPE is one of image. Liv-Sheffield is part of the NPR plans and TPE has morphed in to more of a proper intercity service, whereby their route map is essentially NPR. So to have all the possible NPR services come under one roof now feels right from a public perception perspective.

I predict that NPR will become a combination of TPRU, HS2 and a spur in to Lime St, which combined will offer speed improvements on what we have today. I also think the services will also reverse at Piccadilly to reduce the capital cost, with the frequency limited to 3 tph Liv-Manc-Sheffield-onwards; 3 tph Liv-Manc-Leeds-onwards and 3 tph Manc-Leeds-onwards.

So that is why it leads nicely for TPE to be awarded the Liv-Nottingham service under the banner that their operation becomes NPR.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

I think part of the argument for TPE is one of image. Liv-Sheffield is part of the NPR plans and TPE has morphed in to more of a proper intercity service, whereby their route map is essentially NPR. So to have all the possible NPR services come under one roof now feels right from a public perception perspective.

I predict that NPR will become a combination of TPRU, HS2 and a spur in to Lime St, which combined will offer speed improvements on what we have today. I also think the services will also reverse at Piccadilly to reduce the capital cost, with the frequency limited to 3 tph Liv-Manc-Sheffield-onwards; 3 tph Liv-Manc-Leeds-onwards and 3 tph Manc-Leeds-onwards.

So that is why it leads nicely for TPE to be awarded the Liv-Nottingham service under the banner that their operation becomes NPR.

NPR is a new line from Liverpool to Leeds via MANCHESTER and Bradford with upgrades between Manchester and Sheffield, York to Newcastle, Sheffield to Hull and Leeds to Hull

 

[Ianno87]

There is also the option of the service remaining with EMR, but operating with the split

I think this might happen, though I could be wrong of course.

Although:

-Taking an operator off the Castlefield corridor can only help its operation

-For similar reasons there'll be political appetite for this to be specified for and operated by a "northern" (small 'n') TOC

 

[Purple Orange]

NPR is a new line from Liverpool to Leeds via MANCHESTER and Bradford with upgrades between Manchester and Sheffield, York to Newcastle, Sheffield to Hull and Leeds to Hull

I understand what the NPR proposal is, but what I’m alluding to is what I think we will get.

 

[tetudo boy]

If Cross Country seem to be considered then why not Northern as 1. Nottingham to Liverpool looks like a prime candidate to be considered as a Connect service and 2. They already run a similar service to Leeds.

The only thing in TPE's favour is the Class 185s but they can easily be cascaded or leased to other TOCs to provide the traction for the service, it shouldn't mean because they are currently operated by TPE that they will always be operated by them.

Ah, looking at what you said I'll change my mind!

 

[Llandudno]

I suspect that TPE will get it.

Shame really as I am pretty certain EMR would be more reliable, especially when it comes to crewing issues.
Better chance of cross Nottingham connections being held for slight late running trains if EMR operated?

If TPE get it there will be less fare competition on the route as well

 

[D365]

CrossCountry seems like an appropriate operator to run the service. Why would TPE run the service?

CrossCountry doesn't operate Sheffield-Manchester via Hope Valley. TPE does.

If Cross Country seem to be considered then why not Northern as 1. Nottingham to Liverpool looks like a prime candidate to be considered as a Connect service and 2. They already run a similar service to Leeds.

The only thing in TPE's favour is the Class 185s but they can easily be cascaded or leased to other TOCs to provide the traction for the service, it shouldn't mean because they are currently operated by TPE that they will always be operated by them.

TPE's existing "South Transpennine" service (Manchester Airport - Cleethorpes) has exactly the same stopping pattern as the Liverpool-Nottingham service; Manchester Piccadilly, Stockport, Sheffield.

What's the point in over complicating things?

 

[tetudo boy]

The reason why I picked CrossCountry in the first place was that CrossCountry had experience over the Class 170s. The reason why I am suddenly talking about the class 170's on the service is that EMR ordered 40 (I don't know if that's how many are being used on the Liverpool-Nottingham-Norwich service) Class 170's (5 of which would be converted from class 171's) to operate the Liverpool-Nottingham-Norwich service. Then, I noticed that First Transpennine express operated some Class 170's up until late 2016. So, if Transpennine Express acquired those 40 (or less depending on how many they operate on the service) Class 170's, then the Class 185 could be a second-hand use for the Class 170s! The reason why I am choosing the Class 170's on this route is that they are more reliable than the Class 185's, but can still run on the service if needed.

I also suggested a Liverpool - Stanstead Airport service on my Ideas thread which follows a very similar route to the Liverpool-Nottingham-Norwich service. The route would be calling at: Liverpool Lime Street - Liverpool South Parkway - Widnes (Limited service) - Warrington Central - Manchester Oxford Road - Manchester Piccadilly - Stockport - Sheffield - Chesterfield - Derby - East Midlands Parkway - Loughborough - Leicester - Melton Mowbray - Oakham - Stamford - Peterborough - March - Ely - Cambridge - Stanstead Airport.

Also, what would happen to the Nottingham-Norwich section? Would it be transferred to Greater Anglia? And what would happen if a railway operator extended the Liverpool-Nottingham service back to Norwich? Through service? (Through service is basically a service which is operated by one operator in one section of the service, and another one on another section of the service. Japan has done this.) A high-frequency Open-Acess Operator running alongside TPE? (Running express services which have less stop's on the Liverpool-Nottingham section, possibly going through Derby, and then going to Norwich) Could these methods of running the service apply to the Liverpool - Stanstead Airport service as well?

Anyways, thank for listening to my slightly silly opinion... What do you think?

 

[D365]

The reason why I picked CrossCountry in the first place was that CrossCountry had experience over the Class 170s. The reason why I am suddenly talking about the class 170's on the service is that EMR ordered 40 (I don't know if that's how many are being used on the Liverpool-Nottingham-Norwich service) Class 170's (5 of which would be converted from class 171's) to operate the Liverpool-Nottingham-Norwich service. Then, I noticed that First Transpennine express operated some Class 170's up until late 2016. So, if Transpennine Express acquired those 40 (or less depending on how many they operate on the service) Class 170's, then the Class 185 could be a second-hand use for the Class 170s! The reason why I am choosing the Class 170's on this route is that they are more reliable than the Class 185's, but can still run on the service if needed.

EMR aren't using Class 170s on the Liverpool to Nottingham service, the whole "reason for being" of this thread is to discuss what will happen to the service post-split.

I'm very confused what you mean by TPE acquiring EMR's fleet of Class 170s. What's the issue with them keeping the Class 185s? EMR's franchise is based upon their acquiring the Class 170s for regional routes.

I also suggested a Liverpool - Stanstead Airport service on my Ideas thread which follows a very similar route to the Liverpool-Nottingham-Norwich service. The route would be calling at: Liverpool Lime Street - Liverpool South Parkway - Widnes (Limited service) - Warrington Central - Manchester Oxford Road - Manchester Piccadilly - Stockport - Sheffield - Chesterfield - Derby - East Midlands Parkway - Loughborough - Leicester - Melton Mowbray - Oakham - Stamford - Peterborough - March - Ely - Cambridge - Stanstead Airport.

What would be the point in this? That's a total duplication of existing services.

Also, what would happen to the Nottingham-Norwich section? Would it be transferred to Greater Anglia? And what would happen if a railway operator extended the Liverpool-Nottingham service back to Norwich? Through service? (Through service is basically a service which is operated by one operator in one section of the service, and another one on another section of the service. Japan has done this.) A high-frequency Open-Acess Operator running alongside TPE? (Running express services which have less stop's on the Liverpool-Nottingham section, possibly going through Derby, and then going to Norwich) Could these methods of running the service apply to the Liverpool - Stanstead Airport service as well?

Again, that's just duplicating the existing service, which defeats the object of splitting it in the first place.

 

[tetudo boy]

EMR aren't using Class 170s on the Liverpool to Nottingham service, the whole "reason for being" of this thread is to discuss what will happen to the service post-split.

I'm very confused what you mean by TPE acquiring EMR's fleet of Class 170s. What's the issue with them keeping the Class 185s? EMR's franchise is based upon their acquiring the Class 170s for regional routes.

1. Ah! I got ahead of myself! I forgot to mention that this discussion could lead to another thread if it was unrelevant (which it is), sorry! Wait a minute, they aren't using the Class 170's on the Liverpool-Nottingham-Norwich service? I'm pretty sure people said that the Class 170's were operating that service... Also, EMR Plans to be the biggest of the class 170 operators over ScotRail. If EMR is planning to use 40 of the set's and use them on the Regional services then only 13 of EMR's current fleet will be in use, so it doesn't really make sense... still though, you have a point.
2. Well, there's only 15 that we're meant for that service and that service can get REALLY crowded, so if TPE borrowed a few set's then it could increase capacity.

What would be the point in this? That's a total duplication of existing services.

Duplication of services? Can you please explain why? I think I'm misunderstanding here...

Again, that's just duplicating the existing service, which defeats the object of splitting it in the first place.

Let me explain what is going on if someone ever decides to make or extend the service to Norwich again.
1. Direct Through service: Let's say if someone decided to have two operators run a service. One operator would run one section of the service and another on the other. This could be the same if Transpennine Express operated the Liverpool - Nottingham section of the service, and...let's say Greater Anglia ran the Nottingham to Norwich Section. This would make sense because TPE or Greater Anglia don't have to run a long service so it both companies have the responsibility for their section of the service.
Or...
2. High-frequency Open Access Operator: If we instead chose the option to have an open access operator to run express services (when I mean express service, I mean having fewer stops than the current service) on the route. Open access operators are known for having a limited amount of trains on their services, but this is quite a popular service. Maybe one train per two hours?

Anyway, these are ideas that might not happen.

 

[Bletchleyite]

With regard to 170s, the only TOC to have used those on Liverpool-Nottingham-Norwich was Central Trains.

 

[D365]

Duplication of services? Can you please explain why? I think I'm misunderstanding here...

Anyone in the Midlands who wants to travel to Cambridgeshire can change trains at Nottingham or Leicester. Your proposed service doesn't do anything substantially different from existing services.

Let me explain what is going on if someone ever decides to make or extend the service to Norwich again.
1. Direct Through service: Let's say if someone decided to have two operators run a service. One operator would run one section of the service and another on the other. This could be the same if Transpennine Express operated the Liverpool - Nottingham section of the service, and...let's say Greater Anglia ran the Nottingham to Norwich Section. This would make sense because TPE or Greater Anglia don't have to run a long service so it both companies have the responsibility for their section of the service.
Or...
2. High-frequency Open Access Operator: If we instead chose the option to have an open access operator to run express services (when I mean express service, I mean having fewer stops than the current service) on the route. Open access operators are known for having a limited amount of trains on their services, but this is quite a popular service. Maybe one train per two hours?

Anyway, these are ideas that might not happen.

I understand what you meant by your original post. My point is, since the existing service is going to be split this decade, there is clearly a reason behind this decision. I'm aware of the scenario you've described, Southeastern and Thameslink are a good example of such a practice.

ORR (Office of Rail & Road) wouldn't allow an open access operator to operate that kind of service as it would be considered "abstractive" - it wouldn't be encouraging any new passengers. In any case, it's completely off-topic for this thread.

 

[Aictos]

CrossCountry doesn't operate Sheffield-Manchester via Hope Valley. TPE does.



TPE's existing "South Transpennine" service (Manchester Airport - Cleethorpes) has exactly the same stopping pattern as the Liverpool-Nottingham service; Manchester Piccadilly, Stockport, Sheffield.

What's the point in over complicating things?

It doesn't over complicate anything if anything it actually simplifies the timetable because if you're travelling between Liverpool and Sheffield instead of a hourly service that can restrict you to a TOC only service, you now have the freedom of using either operated by the same TOC which if timetabled correctly would give a half hourly service so no need for ticket acceptance on other TOCs if your booked train is cancelled, you simply just get the next service that TOC operates.

More to the point I never mentioned TPE in my first post so how you can get Northern and TPE confused together is beyond me.

If you had actually read my post carefully you would have seen that I actually said it would make a good candidate for Northern's Connect brand as it's a similar service to the one they operate to Leeds.

You would also have noticed that I said carefully that while TPE do currently operate Class 185s, it doesn't mean they will forever as they can always be subleased to another TOC eg Southern Class 170s being subleased to ScotRail, cascaded to another TOC eg ex LNER HSTs being cascaded to EMR etc...

 

[D365]

It doesn't over complicate anything if anything it actually simplifies the timetable because if you're travelling between Liverpool and Sheffield instead of a hourly service that can restrict you to a TOC only service, you now have the freedom of using either operated by the same TOC which if timetabled correctly would give a half hourly service so no need for ticket acceptance on other TOCs if your booked train is cancelled, you simply just get the next service that TOC operates.

More to the point I never mentioned TPE in my first post so how you can get Northern and TPE confused together is beyond me.

If you had actually read my post carefully you would have seen that I actually said it would make a good candidate for Northern's Connect brand as it's a similar service to the one they operate to Leeds.

You would also have noticed that I said carefully that while TPE do currently operate Class 185s, it doesn't mean they will forever as they can always be subleased to another TOC eg Southern Class 170s being subleased to ScotRail, cascaded to another TOC eg ex LNER HSTs being cascaded to EMR etc...

I mentioned TPE because Northern don’t run an express service along the Hope Valley line. The express services are provided by TPE and EMR, which both run via Hazel Grove and (for the most part) only call at Stockport along the way. The only service which Northern currently operates is the stopper via Marple.

I can’t see what I’ve missed in your post. What has Northern got to offer that TPE can’t? Northern would need additional stock to operate an additional service, whereas TPE has the advantage that the 185s will be able to do double duty between Manchester and Sheffield. The only downside I can forsee is removing competition on that route.