An hourly semi-fast Manchester to London?

[py_megapixel]

Since the semi-fast Crewe and Birmingham to London services are rather successful, with many people choosing to use them because of the cheap fares, despite them having twice the journey time or more of the alternatives. I can't help but think that the same concept would work from Manchester.

I would propose sending such a service via Birmingham and allowing it to pick up a few stops in between which have a much worse service than they "deserve" - in my list, I've put Bramhall, Poynton and Stone, but those could be different, any suggestions welcome.

Rolling stock, I think this would be rather well suited to Desiros, as with the - possibly some 350s or 360s could be refurbished to a higher standard internally to make them suitable for the long journey times. LNWR does seem the ideal TOC for this, and having a different TOC makes offering cheap fares to lure people onto the service

As for paths - I have no idea if any are feasible to free up south of Birmingham, but to the north, either one of the existing London services could be axed, or - probably more likely - the two XC services could be doubled up and split at Birmingham, or one could be axed altogether.

As I say, all of this is probably rather fantasy thinking, but I'm interested to hear your thoughts.

Spoiler: List of stops (vague idea)

Manchester Piccadilly
Stockport
Cheadle Hulme
Bramhall
Poynton
Stoke-on-Trent
Stone
Stafford
Wolverhampton
Birmingham New Street
Birmingham International
Coventry
Rugby
Milton Keynes Central
Watford Junction
London Euston

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Crosscountry was overcrowded enough before covid-19. No capacity on much of the route proposed.

 

[Purple Orange]

Perhaps an 9-car IET from Manc-Paddington via Brum & Reading? Operated in place of the XC manc South coast services.

 

[py_megapixel]

Perhaps an 9-car IET from Manc-Paddington via Brum & Reading? Operated in place of the XC manc South coast services.

That doesn't really do any of the things I suggested; that would still be an "express" service so there would still be no low-cost competitor between Manchester and London, and with an IET you probably wouldn't pick up any of the other stops...

 

[RT4038]

Perhaps those running the railway are trying to maximise the revenues, rather than run trains specifically for cheaper fares?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Extending the LNR from Crewe would achieve this, and I believe pre-COVID they were looking to try to get this.

 

[Purple Orange]

Extending the LNR from Crewe would achieve this, and I believe pre-COVID they were looking to try to get this.

What stops would that have that Avanti & TfW does not? Then just like the other threads about this line, an existing service would need to go.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Oct 2020 ==

That doesn't really do any of the things I suggested; that would still be an "express" service so there would still be no low-cost competitor between Manchester and London, and with an IET you probably wouldn't pick up any of the other stops...

It would only be cheadle Hulme that a London bound train would stop at surely?

 

[py_megapixel]

It would only be cheadle Hulme that a London bound train would stop at surely?

To be fair, Cheadle Hulme already gets 3tph while the others I mentioned only get 1

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Oct 2020 ==

Perhaps those running the railway are trying to maximise the revenues, rather than run trains specifically for cheaper fares?

Perhaps that's the wrong way to run a railway... after all, as a society we don't expect roads to come anywhere near breaking even, for example!

 

[Purple Orange]

To be fair, Cheadle Hulme already gets 3tph while the others I mentioned only get 1

The others need more services, but they should be all stop to Piccadilly. And a London-Manc LNW service would be a min 8-car, which I’m not sure some of those stations can accommodate.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The others need more services, but they should be all stop to Piccadilly. And a London-Manc LNW service would be a min 8-car, which I’m not sure some of those stations can accommodate.

Class 350s have UDS (Unit Deselect, a primitive form of SDO operated by the guard), so as long as they can accommodate a 4-car set it's fine.

 

[Purple Orange]

Class 350s have UDS (Unit Deselect, a primitive form of SDO operated by the guard), so as long as they can accommodate a 4-car set it's fine.

But which of the existing services would give way?

PS, isn’t this the model for Manc-London services on the WCML post HS2? In fact on the Manc-Stockport-Crewe/Stoke branches we could be moving from...

• 6 intercity services (3 x London, 2 x XC, 1 x TfW)
• 3 stoppers

Potentially moving to...

• 1 HS2 via Stoke & Macclesfield, then on to Stockport and Piccadilly
• 2 London WCML (1 via Wilmslow, 1 via Stoke & Macclesfield)
• 1 XC (Brum & Bristol)
• 1 TfW
• 4 Stoppers (2 via Wilmslow, 2 via Macclesfield)

Personally I think 6 tph to London from Manc is excessive and should give way to more stoppers, but that doesn’t appear to be the direction it’s heading,

 

[The Planner]

Since the semi-fast Crewe and Birmingham to London services are rather successful, with many people choosing to use them because of the cheap fares, despite them having twice the journey time or more of the alternatives. I can't help but think that the same concept would work from Manchester.

I would propose sending such a service via Birmingham and allowing it to pick up a few stops in between which have a much worse service than they "deserve" - in my list, I've put Bramhall, Poynton and Stone, but those could be different, any suggestions welcome.

Rolling stock, I think this would be rather well suited to Desiros, as with the - possibly some 350s or 360s could be refurbished to a higher standard internally to make them suitable for the long journey times. LNWR does seem the ideal TOC for this, and having a different TOC makes offering cheap fares to lure people onto the service

As for paths - I have no idea if any are feasible to free up south of Birmingham, but to the north, either one of the existing London services could be axed, or - probably more likely - the two XC services could be doubled up and split at Birmingham, or one could be axed altogether.

As I say, all of this is probably rather fantasy thinking, but I'm interested to hear your thoughts.


Manchester Piccadilly
Stockport
Cheadle Hulme
Bramhall
Poynton
Stoke-on-Trent
Stone
Stafford
Wolverhampton
Birmingham New Street
Birmingham International
Coventry
Rugby
Milton Keynes Central
Watford Junction
London Euston

Take out Cheadle, Bramhall and Poynton and its effectively an InterCity service. Any reason to miss out Macc and Congleton? If its an LNWR type affair then you need to consider Penkridge, probably Smethwick GB too. Only way it works south of Brum is to tag it on to an existing service as the paths aren't there, so it goes via Northampton too by default, and we all know how well that works based on the evidence... It certainly cannot replace an Avanti or XC service though, so it falls over immediately unless its post HS2.

 

[Purple Orange]

Would a resident of Cheadle Hulme, Bramhall or Poynton use this service to get to Birmingham or London?

Post HS2, Cheadle Hulme & Bramhall residents will likely board HS2 at the airport or change at Piccadilly, Poynton residents would start at Macclesfield or the Airport.

 

[Bald Rick]

Perhaps that's the wrong way to run a railway... after all, as a society we don't expect roads to come anywhere near breaking even, for example!

Quite right, they don’t break even - we expect them to deliver a considerable net profit to the Government!

Always worth remembering that.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Oct 2020 ==

As an aside, one possible outcome of all operators now being on Government books is that competition between them is minimised.

 

[py_megapixel]

Quite right, they don’t break even - we expect them to deliver a considerable net profit to the Government

How can they deliver a considerable profit to the government?
There is no revenue stream from them, and they are funded through general taxation.

And even if there is something I am missing here, my point still stands. There are plenty of things which are simply accepted by society to be worth paying for, for everyone's benefit - so why not public transport?

 

[Bald Rick]

How can they deliver a considerable profit to the government?
There is no revenue stream from them, and they are funded through general taxation.

And even if there is something I am missing here, my point still stands. There are plenty of things which are simply accepted by society to be worth paying for, for everyone's benefit - so why not public transport?

Vehicle excise duty alone brings in around £7bn a year. That is a direct tax on vehicle ownership. Fuel duty brings in nearly £30bn. That is a direct tax on fuel use, at the point of purchase. Getting on for £40bn revenue directly from road users. Total spend on UK roads - new build, and maintenance, by central Government and local authorities, is about £10bn. That’s before the indirect taxes of VAT on fuel (and fuel duty) - another £10bn, and VAT on new car sales - another £8bn.

I’m not for one moment arguing that the Government shouldn’t pay for public transport; it is absolutely the right thing to do. However to say that road users don’t pay their way for the roads budget just isn’t right.

 

[Purple Orange]

Vehicle excise duty alone brings in around £7bn a year. That is a direct tax on vehicle ownership. Fuel duty brings in nearly £30bn. That is a direct tax on fuel use, at the point of purchase. Getting on for £40bn revenue directly from road users. Total spend on UK roads - new build, and maintenance, by central Government and local authorities, is about £10bn. That’s before the indirect taxes of VAT on fuel (and fuel duty) - another £10bn, and VAT on new car sales - another £8bn.

I’m not for one moment arguing that the Government shouldn’t pay for public transport; it is absolutely the right thing to do. However to say that road users don’t pay their way for the roads budget just isn’t right.

Brining it back to Manchester-London. Unless a new road can be shown to increase vehicle ownership, the revenue you highlight for vehicle excise duty is already accounted for (however no new road is being built). Fuel duty and VAT on fuel for a journey between Manc and London would need to be compared to the sales value and VAT receipts of London-Manchester tickets, which will now be going direct to the DfT. Furthermore, nobody in their right mind would drive in to central London. Driving in to central Manchester is bad enough.

 

[Bald Rick]

the revenue you highlight for vehicle excise duty is already accounted for

Good point.

The revenue for Manchester - London rail tickets is already accounted for, as Avanti West Coast made their successful franchise bid on the basis of it, and are contracted to pay Government on that basis (Covid notwithstanding). This is on the assumption of the service pattern we know. Adding in a WMT style service would put a dent in that revenue, and may well dent revenue on the market as a whole.

I agree that no one in their right mind would drive into central London - but plenty do. Few will have come from central Manchester though. However there will be many more who do the Manchester area to the London area, where the car is a far more attractive option than the train for journey time.

Fuel duty and VAT revenue to Government for a typical Manchester - London car journey will be between £30-£50 depending on fuel consumption.

Incidentally there is no VAT on rail tickets in the U.K.

 

[Purple Orange]

Rail between London and Manchester is the only attractive option if you happen to be travelling to central London or central Manchester. The only reason for traveling by car is if, as you say, you are travelling to say an area on the periphery of Greater London that is easily accessed from the M25, but those journeys were probably never a competitor with rail. Even on the periphery of Greater Manchester rail may be a more attractive option given that Stockport. Wigan, Wilmslow and Warrington are well served.

 

[Bald Rick]

Rail between London and Manchester is the only attractive option if you happen to be travelling to central London or central Manchester.

It really isn’t. Whilst one man’s anecdote does not make a trend, I’ve driven from near London to central Manchetser several times, because it was more attractive than heading into central London on the train, getting to Euston, catching the train, and then getting to my central Manchester end destination. With young family and all the necessary stuff that was coming with us. We’ll be doing it again in the Spring. (And this is despite the fact we all get the train for free).

As ever, people choose their mode of transport based on their own personal balance of cost, time, convenient and comfort. For London to Manchester there are various options. Train is a clear winner for many. But not all.

Would adding a slower but cheaper rail alternative help bring more people to rail? Possibly, but not many. Would it cause the railways financial position to worsen? Almost certainly.

 

[Purple Orange]

It really isn’t. Whilst one man’s anecdote does not make a trend, I’ve driven from near London to central Manchetser several times, because it was more attractive than heading into central London on the train, getting to Euston, catching the train, and then getting to my central Manchester end destination. With young family and all the necessary stuff that was coming with us. We’ll be doing it again in the Spring. (And this is despite the fact we all get the train for free).

As ever, people choose their mode of transport based on their own personal balance of cost, time, convenient and comfort. For London to Manchester there are various options. Train is a clear winner for many. But not all.

Would adding a slower but cheaper rail alternative help bring more people to rail? Possibly, but not many. Would it cause the railways financial position to worsen? Almost certainly.

Perhaps we can agree that adding a 4th service is not worth it?

 

[Llandudno]

If time is not that important, surely just buy a Northern ticket from Manchester to Crewe and then a separate ticket for the Crewe to London stopper?

Probably about a third of the Avanti price, but takes around 5 hours, but I think still preferable to a National Express Coach which takes about the same length of time, M6 permitting!

 

[Jamesrob637]

If time is not that important, surely just buy a Northern ticket from Manchester to Crewe and then a separate ticket for the Crewe to London stopper?

Probably about a third of the Avanti price, but takes around 5 hours, but I think still preferable to a National Express Coach which takes about the same length of time, M6 permitting!

Bingo. However this is only partially relevant for this thread:
WHY WHY WHY are no cheapo offered from Levenshulme or Heaton Chapel?! I just end up paying from Manchester or walking the half an hour to Stockport!

 

[tbtc]

There's suggestions on here about the apparent importance of "budget" trains from Euston to destinations like Liverpool/ Blackpool/ Manchester Airport/ Manchester... but never from St Pancras/ Kings Cross to Nottingham/ Sheffield/ Leeds etc - maybe it's because the eastern side of the country has some Open Access, though these services don't serve the bigger cities (and none of them are hourly).

We have these threads where people suggest that the Euston - Piccadilly service should be cut to just two trains per hour and that there's no need for HS2 as there'll be little demand for such long distance services, but also we need to re-open the Bakewell line to cater to the London - Manchester market and also introduce new types of WCML service!

I can see the appeal of cheaper alternative services, sure, but the problem I'd have is that (assuming we are talking about a post-Covid situation where travel demands go back towards "normal") the southern end of the WCML is pretty full, so any Manchester service would have to be an extension of an existing Euston departure (which is already fairly busy).

And any such service is the "full fare" service at at least some stations at the Euston end, so you'd have a situation where you had a trade off between "selling full price tickets to Trent Valley/ Milton Keynes passengers" and "selling cheaper tickets to Manchester passengers".

Personally, if you want to get WMT or whoever to provide a Manchester service then I'd focus more on providing a *Birmingham* - Manchester service, since those are two cities linked by insufficient rail capacity (whereas London already has around three times the seats to Manchester, so is less of a pressing issue - you could "solve" any perceived problems by insisting that the new nationalised operation have a certain number of "cheap" tickets)

Obviously if we are talking about a post-Covid situation where long distance travel doesn't go back to the old "normal" then I think we can forget about any new services, as we'll have plenty seats on the existing services to cope with demand.

 

[Purple Orange]

Post covid, we will of course see demand for rail travel recover. It is a question of how long will that take? We will see airports back at their previous levels too.

 

[py_megapixel]

We will see airports back at their previous levels too.

That is not certain. Over lockdown in the summer many people will have rediscovered UK holiday destinations and realised that they are a hell of a lot less hassle than overseas. Of course there is the other important fact that a large proportion of business travel is obsolete now.

 

[geordieblue]

That is not certain. Over lockdown in the summer many people will have rediscovered UK holiday destinations and realised that they are a hell of a lot less hassle than overseas. Of course there is the other important fact that a large proportion of business travel is obsolete now.

Also I'd imagine airports are likely to become less socially acceptable from an environmental perspective (until (or if) some sort of electric plane is invented).

 

[Bald Rick]

Post covid, we will of course see demand for rail travel recover. It is a question of how long will that take? We will see airports back at their previous levels too.

Back at previous levels? Possibly, eventually, on average.

Back to previously forecast levels? Unlikely.

How long? Well that’s the big question. How do you plan for that?

 

[Purple Orange]

Back at previous levels? Possibly, eventually, on average.

Back to previously forecast levels? Unlikely.

How long? Well that’s the big question. How do you plan for that?

A time frame could be 1, 2 or 5 years or even longer. The point is less about when it will happen but will it happen. How do you plan? You look at the trends of the recovery for a start, but yes it is a very difficult question. What is absurd is the idea of lying down and assuming life will have changed beyond all recognition. It won’t. Look at how many people (rightly or wrongly) are out in the streets during the pandemic after the initial lockdown was eased.

I certainly think Rail will recover faster than air travel and the the mix of the type of travel will change too. In some of our biggest cities we have seen an increase in demand for living in the centre during lock-down and if a greater population density is to be had, then better public transport generally will be needed. However the upshot is that the cities remain attractive to employers to locate their office, after all they will still need an office location and the city centres are better locations than out of town industrial estates.

We may well find that more people will work from home more, but more people will be working for an employer with an office in a city centre, rather than on the edge of a city. This means that rail travel in to city centres will still be needed and the % of local, regional, long distance rail travel may well change too.

 

[Bald Rick]

I certainly think Rail will recover faster than air travel and the the mix of the type of travel will change too

That depends when international restrictions are eased. When they are, the non business air market (ie most of it) will recover very quickly.

We may well find that more people will work from home more,

Agreed.

but more people will be working for an employer with an office in a city centre,

Possibly, but that doesn’t mean they will be travelling to it 4/5 times a week.

Be in no doubt, commuting has had a transformational change in the last 6 months. My guess, for what it’s worth, is that we when it has recovered, peak numbers will be 30% off previously.