• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Should Manchester-London go quarter-hourly?

Status
Not open for further replies.

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
19,748
One minute isn't going to make much difference, and that minute can be made up by shortening the lengthy dwell at Wolverhampton.

The EMR could wait in the Harecastle loop, which I've just discovered exists from the other thread.
One minute can be a path, and you are mixing up Cross Country with the Avanti Scotland service, the XC has a standard dwell at Wolves which cannot be reduced.

The EMR has a six minute turnround at Crewe, how are you dealing with that if its waiting to be overtaken south of Kidsgrove (which it can't)?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

BluePenguin

On Moderation
Joined
26 Sep 2016
Messages
1,605
Location
Kent
I think losing the direct XC service to the south coast would be the casualty, given it is faster to transfer through London anyway.
The XC service to the South East is more important and covers more of the country. Manchester definitely does not need anymore London services, especially whilst Liverpool only has one per hour!

If the demand and capacity to Manchester is there, it would be sensible for at least 2 trains her hour to call en route at Ruby, Stafford and Crewe for connections to Birmingham, Liverpool and Chester respectively.
 

DavidGrain

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2017
Messages
1,488
The XC service to the South East is more important and covers more of the country. Manchester definitely does not need anymore London services, especially whilst Liverpool only has one per hour!

If the demand and capacity to Manchester is there, it would be sensible for at least 2 trains her hour to call en route at Ruby, Stafford and Crewe for connections to Birmingham, Liverpool and Chester respectively.

I do not see anyone getting on a London to Manchester train with a view to changing at Rugby for Birmingham.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,214
One of them could use platform 1?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

*Fairly* sure that requires an approach control, and thus sticking another minute or so in the anointed train.
 

BluePenguin

On Moderation
Joined
26 Sep 2016
Messages
1,605
Location
Kent
I do not see anyone getting on a London to Manchester train with a view to changing at Rugby for Birmingham.
That is because most of them are first stop Crewe or Stoke and hardly any of them stop at Rugby - how useful this is to other passengers I cannot comment on. If more trains did call at Ruby I am sure you would see many more people doing this.

Taking the LNWR Crewe service to Ruby and changing for Birmingham was the specific example I was thinking of. LNWR’s Crewe service is the only one not to go via Northampton. The rest all do so making journeys to Birmingham very slow, due to the lack of Avanti connection.

If only one of the Manchester services called at Ruby to provide a decent connection then it would be possible to provide quicker journeys to Coventry, Birmingham and beyond.
 

jfollows

Established Member
Joined
26 Feb 2011
Messages
10,174
Location
Wilmslow
I do not see anyone getting on a London to Manchester train with a view to changing at Rugby for Birmingham.
I would.
But, to me this is really an argument for HS2, so that I can get from Wilmslow to places via Nuneaton and Rugby simply. I do not see a need for 4 trains an hour Manchester-London, today or pre-Covid anyway.
 

London Trains

Established Member
Joined
9 Oct 2017
Messages
1,237
That is because most of them are first stop Crewe or Stoke and hardly any of them stop at Rugby - how useful this is to other passengers I cannot comment on. If more trains did call at Ruby I am sure you would see many more people doing this.

Taking the LNWR Crewe service to Ruby and changing for Birmingham was the specific example I was thinking of. LNWR’s Crewe service is the only one not to go via Northampton. The rest all do so making journeys to Birmingham very slow, due to the lack of Avanti connection.

If only one of the Manchester services called at Ruby to provide a decent connection then it would be possible to provide quicker journeys to Coventry, Birmingham and beyond.

Who would change at Rugby for Birmingham if travelling from Manchester / Liverpool / somewhere else in the north when there are direct trains from most places, and good connections at Crewe if a direct service doesnt exist / you want to avoid XC?

Also all of Nuneaton, Tamworth, Lichfield and Rugeley all have their own direct services so this would not be a reason either.

I would like more services to call at Rugby, but connections to Birmingham is not a reason to call there.

Rugby does provide connections to Northampton, but these can equally be provided at Milton Keynes.
 

BluePenguin

On Moderation
Joined
26 Sep 2016
Messages
1,605
Location
Kent
Who would change at Rugby for Birmingham if travelling from Manchester / Liverpool / somewhere else in the north when there are direct trains from most places, and good connections at Crewe if a direct service doesnt exist / you want to avoid XC?
I am not sure where this came from. That is a completely different kettle of fish. I was not talking about connectivity between towns and cities in the Midlands and North. I am referring to passengers travelling South to North and vice versa and making a suggestion about additional services between London and Manchester:

My point is that if more trains from **London** to Manchester were run, then the capacity should be used to provide connections en route to other places. London - Manchester is pretty well served already don’t forget. Liverpool and Stafford have only 1 fast Avanti service per hour whilst Chester does not even have that.

Changing at Milton Keynes is an option I suppose but not always possible either


I would.
But, to me this is really an argument for HS2, so that I can get from Wilmslow to places via Nuneaton and Rugby simply. I do not see a need for 4 trains an hour Manchester-London, today or pre-Covid anyway.
It seems I’m not the only one who wants better connections at Rugby then. You and I plus many others are on the same page. There is a market for better connectivity

HS2 may fix a lot of capacity issues but it’s still a long way off. Let’s make the most of the capacity we have now. Another train per hour that is first stop Stoke-on-Trent pr Crewe will only ever useful to a certain number of people...
 
Last edited:

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
35,965
Are you suggesting that London to Birmingham passengers might get a Manchester train and change on to s Birmingham train there?

Why would you do that, when there’s a Birmingham train leaving Euston three minutes behind the
Manchester train, which will get you there quicker?
 

BluePenguin

On Moderation
Joined
26 Sep 2016
Messages
1,605
Location
Kent
Are you suggesting that London to Birmingham passengers might get a Manchester train and change on to s Birmingham train there?

Why would you do that, when there’s a Birmingham train leaving Euston three minutes behind the
Manchester train, which will get you there quicker?
For the reasons I stated before. In addition, taking LNWR all the way to Rugby or Birmingham is very slow whilst Avanti is very expensive. There is only one LNWR Crewe service per hour.

If an additional Manchester train stopped at Rugby or Stafford it would allow for more connections for more places.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
19,748
I still dont get it, if a Manchester stopped you would still be waiting that long for the connection that the next fast train from Euston to Birmingham that departs Euston 23 minutes after the Manchester you got off would arrive within 5 minutes of you at New St?
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
35,965
For the reasons I stated before.

You might have stated them before, but I’m afraid I don’t understand. Could you perhaps give an example of why a passenger for Birmingham, with 5 direct trains an hour to choose from (including all variations of fast and cheap) would choose to board a non-Birmingham train at Euston, and change at Rugby?
 

jfisher21

Member
Joined
21 Mar 2011
Messages
218
No need for a 4th London - Manchester Pendolino.
However there is no cheap option at present so I think it is worth considering extending the LNW Crewe service to Warrington and Manchester Victoria.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,214
No need for a 4th London - Manchester Pendolino.
However there is no cheap option at present so I think it is worth considering extending the LNW Crewe service to Warrington and Manchester Victoria.

There is a cheap option. You just have to change at Crewe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top