Rail operator plans new 140mph service to London

[Aictos]

Having casually observed GC HSTs at York and 180s at Doncaster it seemed to me that a 153 could have carried the passenger load on offer. For example, around 10am an EC 225 arrives in York for Edinburgh with most seats occupied and almost all reserved, followed a couple of minutes later by GC en route for Sunderland - 5 coach HST with at best a couple of dozen on board.

Therefore I ask, where are the passengers going to come from more services to Bradford, or Hull to Liverpool.

Personally I would rather see the limited timetable slots offered to operators who can run, and fill, 9 coach trains.

Although I pretty sure the guys can more then speak for their services, from what's been said and from past experience of using their services, their services aren't as underused as you make out.

When they first started out, yes it was fairly underused but growth has happened and they like Hull Trains are very popular, the amount of people getting on and off at York for example is just one station where I've seen the GC service I'm on being very popular.

In fact, I would be very happy if either Hull Trains or Grand Central were allowed to call at Peterborough but that's another day.

 

[tbtc]

Having casually observed GC HSTs at York and 180s at Doncaster it seemed to me that a 153 could have carried the passenger load on offer. For example, around 10am an EC 225 arrives in York for Edinburgh with most seats occupied and almost all reserved, followed a couple of minutes later by GC en route for Sunderland - 5 coach HST with at best a couple of dozen on board.

Therefore I ask, where are the passengers going to come from more services to Bradford, or Hull to Liverpool.

Personally I would rather see the limited timetable slots offered to operators who can run, and fill, 9 coach trains.

That ties in with my observations of Grand Central services and with my view of whether Open Access is a good use of scarce resources on the ECML.

The only two comments I'd make are:

1. If you think the Sunderland services are quiet, you want to see how bad the Bradford ones are doing (that's if the services are running, they are poor for reliability)

2. Sadly the ORCATS allocation means that GC will get a large sum of money for running empty trains from London to York

As for the Alliance plan, well... no thanks. It looks like an excuse to ride on the back of the Manchester - London service, by running slightly further beyond to/from Bradford and the Calder Valley. I honestly thought DB were better than that. Is there really an untapped demand to go from Liverpool to Hull that Transpennine's frequent services isn't serving (by getting passengers to change at Manchester or Leeds)?

If DB want to pump millions into new trains and new paths then how about investing in Cross Country? You'll fill trains a lot easier, you've as much chance of running at 140mph and you don't even need to find some "unserved" flow to justify it

 

[Eric]

That ties in with my observations of Grand Central services and with my view of whether Open Access is a good use of scarce resources on the ECML.

The only two comments I'd make are:

1. If you think the Sunderland services are quiet, you want to see how bad the Bradford ones are doing (that's if the services are running, they are poor for reliability)

2. Sadly the ORCATS allocation means that GC will get a large sum of money for running empty trains from London to York

As for the Alliance plan, well... no thanks. It looks like an excuse to ride on the back of the Manchester - London service, by running slightly further beyond to/from Bradford and the Calder Valley. I honestly thought DB were better than that. Is there really an untapped demand to go from Liverpool to Hull that Transpennine's frequent services isn't serving (by getting passengers to change at Manchester or Leeds)?If DB want to pump millions into new trains and new paths then how about investing in Cross Country? You'll fill trains a lot easier, you've as much chance of running at 140mph and you don't even need to find some "unserved" flow to justify it

As someone who lives in Bradford, I can tell you that there is substantial demand for direct routes from Bradford to Hull and Liverpool and I for one hope they get approved.

 

[Failed Unit]

Although I pretty sure the guys can more then speak for their services, from what's been said and from past experience of using their services, their services aren't as underused as you make out.

When they first started out, yes it was fairly underused but growth has happened and they like Hull Trains are very popular, the amount of people getting on and off at York for example is just one station where I've seen the GC service I'm on being very popular.

In fact, I would be very happy if either Hull Trains or Grand Central were allowed to call at Peterborough but that's another day.

At Kings Cross this evening the 1650 Sunderland service was parked next to the 1700 Edinburgh service. I would be interested to know how many got off at York (it was reasonably loaded) and if the GC service did not exist how many would have still travelled. It is good that the choice existed, but I am sure any York passengers could have got absorbed onto the East Coast trains which were not full and standing (or at least the 1700 was just a reasonable load)

Likewise if you see a good loading at York are people going to Northallerton or Sunderland?

Don't get me wrong, it is good to see Hartlepool and Sunderland getting a decent link to civalisation, before going south from Hartlepool was very painful either the wrong way to Newcastle or via the smog.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As someone who lives in Bradford, I can tell you that there is substantial demand for direct routes from Bradford to Hull and Liverpool and I for one hope they get approved.

I am sure there is, but do you really care how it is done, if the national express east coast plan of extending a Leeds service every hour to Bradford had happened I am sure you would all be happy and it would make good use of paths on the network. It is still significantly quicker to travel via Leeds and change, something the Hull and Sunderland routes didn't have the problem of (although it doesn't seem to harm WSRC)

 

[The Decapod]

In addition to trains that operate on the Channel Tunnel line, aren't there other trains in operation here already that have a design speed of 140 mph (e.g. Class 91 electric loco) but have never been cleared for operating at that speed? An HST 125 was tested at over 140 mph many years ago.

I also read somewhere that Deltics, running solo, were believed to be capable of exceeding 200 mph, but nobody was ever silly enough to find out, 125 mph being the fastest speed achieved - although, of course, they were limited to 100 mph in service.

 

[Bittern]

http://www.alliancerail.co.uk/gner/

Well at least the logo is similar to the old one.

 

[tbtc]

As someone who lives in Bradford, I can tell you that there is substantial demand for direct routes from Bradford to Hull and Liverpool and I for one hope they get approved.

How substantial?

We'd all like to have more links to our towns, but (beyond a couple of weekends when the Bulls are playing their rugby in Humberside) I'm not aware of any significant demand for a through service.

It smacks of "what two places can we link up to convince people we are providing a missing link and get our foot in the door to raid some ORCATS money from other flows" to me, sorry.

I could see more logic if they were saying "link Bradford to Manchester Airport" for example

 

[Bungle]

It smacks of "what two places can we link up to convince people we are providing a missing link and get our foot in the door to raid some ORCATS money from other flows" to me, sorry.

Exactly. I'm amazed that more people haven't seen straight through the press release to realise that this is exactly what it is.

The general feeling is that the railway is already too complicated. Do we really need yet another small niche operator serving just a couple of routes with another non-standard train fleet and the inevitable non-standard ticket options, and taking up vital capacity on the country's main routes? If the service was that desperately required, then the local authorities should be lobbying for it to be included in a franchise. Look what happened with Northern and the Nottingham-Leeds service, for example. If there's really THAT much demand from Skipton and Ilkley, tell East Coast to do it.

 

[sprinterguy]

In addition to trains that operate on the Channel Tunnel line, aren't there other trains in operation here already that have a design speed of 140 mph (e.g. Class 91 electric loco) but have never been cleared for operating at that speed? An HST 125 was tested at over 140 mph many years ago.

Yes; the class 91s on the East Coast and the Pendolinos on the West Coast are both capable of 140mph, but are unable to make use of this capability. It was an East Coast HST running in shortened 2+5 formation that reached 144mph in 1985 on a Newcastle to Kings Cross press run, beating the 143mph record that the prototype train had set over ten years previously.

I also read somewhere that Deltics, running solo, were believed to be capable of exceeding 200 mph, but nobody was ever silly enough to find out, 125 mph being the fastest speed achieved - although, of course, they were limited to 100 mph in service.

Not a hope in hell of a Deltic reaching 200mph AFAIK, even light engine: The power units and traction motors just aren't set up to sustain that sort of level of power output.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

How substantial?

We'd all like to have more links to our towns, but (beyond a couple of weekends when the Bulls are playing their rugby in Humberside) I'm not aware of any significant demand for a through service.

It smacks of "what two places can we link up to convince people we are providing a missing link and get our foot in the door to raid some ORCATS money from other flows" to me, sorry.

I could see more logic if they were saying "link Bradford to Manchester Airport" for example

I completely agree.

On the subject of Grand Central train loadings, I have been on and seen some very well loaded Sunderland services, even in first class, that were defiitely carrying more than a couple of dozen passengers.

 

[Greenback]

"what two places can we link up to convince people we are providing a missing link and get our foot in the door to raid some ORCATS money from other flows"

Sums up Open Access quite nicely really!

 

[sprinterguy]

I tend to think that Wrexham and Shropshire have actually set out to fill a gap in the market and provide a completely new service: The others, Hull Trains and Grand Central (Especially GC) seem to be suspect of raiding existing flows as a main priority.

 

[EWS 58038]

I tend to think that Wrexham and Shropshire have actually set out to fill a gap in the market and provide a completely new service: The others, Hull Trains and Grand Central (Especially GC) seem to be suspect of raiding existing flows as a main priority.

Sorry... but there was just 1 direct service from London to Hull... Now there are 8 of which 7 are operated by Hull Trains... Gap filled...

Same goes up for Grand Central... they offer services not operated by the Franchised operator.

And if there is one thing for certain, Open Access is value for money. Both for the passenger and tax payer.

 

[sprinterguy]

I still reckon that GC were more intent on breaking into the London to Doncaster and London to York markets than filling a gap, and similar with Hull Trains. Sunderland, Bradford and Hull all already had good links into the franchised East Coast services, with Hull probably the poorest relation out of that list. Whilst I am pleased that my old home town (Sunderland) now has a dedicated, direct service to London, I'm still of the opinion that it's there principally with an eye on revenue to/from York, with patronage north of that a welcome bonus.

 

[Greenback]

Please can you explain in what way an open access operator is value for money?

I am not being provocative, I would genuinely like to know the argument sin favour of them. As far as I can see, Hull Trains etc (WSMR to a lesser extent, but they don't seem to be doing as well as they hoped financially) can't survive without taking revenue from franchised operators.

 

[Sapphire Blue]

So have passenger numbers on East Coast fallen since the introduction of Hull/GC?

If so, argument proven.

If not, end of argument.

 

[sprinterguy]

So have passenger numbers on East Coast fallen since the introduction of Hull/GC?

If so, argument proven.

If not, end of argument.

That's not a completely fair test, as rail patronage everywhere has been rising over the last decade, but I see your point.

 

[Max]

I still reckon that GC were more intent on breaking into the London to Doncaster and London to York markets than filling a gap, and similar with Hull Trains. Sunderland, Bradford and Hull all already had good links into the franchised East Coast services, with Hull probably the poorest relation out of that list. Whilst I am pleased that my old home town (Sunderland) now has a dedicated, direct service to London, I'm still of the opinion that it's there principally with an eye on revenue to/from York, with patronage north of that a welcome bonus.

I'm sorry but I don't really agree with this. Hull Trains is a local company, based in East Yorkshire, and has (in my view) generated a lot of extra business on the Hull-London flow. The city has suffered great decline in the past 30 years, one of the key contributors being its isolation geographically and the new links to London have helped to encourage new business and investment in the city. But it is not just Hull that has benefited. Howden has seen huge increases in passenger numbers and additional calling trains thanks to Hull Trains' decision to serve it and Selby has seen services to London (and Doncaster to an extent) restored after the ECML was diverted.

If you travel on Hull Trains reasonably frequently you will realise that the core market is not Doncaster but Hull and Brough. Besides, over the past few weeks the services have provided useful links between Hull and Doncaster whilst Northern has been bustituted for four consecutive weeks on the Goole line.

I don't agree that what Hull Trains have done is revenue extraction. Clearly it is always going to be more attractive to the average passenger if they can hop on a modern, fast train direct to the capital, rather than having to take a slow connecting service (often operated by rather tired, low capacity units) and then mess around with luggage at Doncaster.

 

[OMGitsDAVE]

I don't see what is going on at all here!

GC, HT & WSMR have all been set up to fill in gaps, i mean Sunderland, Hartlepool & Eaglescliffe benefit dramatically from direct London services, York to a lesser extent but it definately proves worthy of such services.

EC failed to fill the gap, so lone behold here we have the gap-fillers - and it seems they work fine, so now everyone turns against them for working on areas which were not predicted to have such numbers and becoming successful. Go figure!

 

[sprinterguy]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not biased against open access operators: I've travelled with Wrexham and Shropshire a fair few times now, and think they are the best train operator in the UK bar none. I've travelled with GC as well, but not with Hull Trains.

As I said, Hull has to have been the weakest relation out of the destinations served by GC or Hull Trains in terms of having good links to London, so will have benefitted most out of having direct trains to London, which will naturally attract new custom from the previously unconnected towns they serve. It's good that open access operators have the opportunity to step in where the franchised operators stubbornly refuse to go, and attract new business to the railways, but the question is whether the new custom attracted by the new service outweighs custom cherrypicked from existing proven flows.

It serves the franchised TOC right if they lose passengers to the open access operator on the flow being served by the open access operation, as it's their fault for not showing any initiative in attempting to serve that route themselves, but I don't think it is only these existing passengers who go over to the open access service.

 

[tbtc]

I'm sorry but I don't really agree with this. Hull Trains is a local company, based in East Yorkshire, and has (in my view) generated a lot of extra business on the Hull-London flow. The city has suffered great decline in the past 30 years, one of the key contributors being its isolation geographically and the new links to London have helped to encourage new business and investment in the city

Hull Trains were partly set up by Anglia Railways and are now a part of Aberdeen's FirstGroup, so I'm not sure how "local" they are.

However, my main quibble is with the "direct rail links to London are an economic boost which leads to new investment" argument which a number of people trot out to defend these services.

I'm not having a go at you, Max, but since Hull Trains/ Grand Central have been running for a few years I'd be interested if anyone could prove which businesses have relocated so Hartlepoo/ Hull etc as a direct result of there being a direct train service. Companies and Government invest in new cities regularly but how many examples can be shown to have happened *because* of a train service (I mean, Nissan built a massive car plant in Washington Tyne & Wear and that doesn't even have a station)

 

[sprinterguy]

There's absolutely sod all happened in Sunderland since the coming of Grand central. Then again, there's always sod all happening in Sunderland...

 

[tbtc]

There's absolutely sod all happened in Sunderland since the coming of Grand central. Then again, there's always sod all happening in Sunderland...

My wife is a Mackem, and I'm a fan of the place, but I honestly can't think of any business that has come to Sunderland as a direct result of GC running trains there (unless Darren Bent stated he'd only move to a football club in a city with a direct London train service?)

Living in Sheffield, I can't think of any companies who invested in Barnsley when Midland Mainline started operating direct trains there, nor can I think of any who left Barnsley as a direct result of the Midland Mainline service being cut.

It's a nice argument ("direct trains to London will attract lots of businesses to invest in our town and put this place on the map...") but I can't think of any examples, so one of the main arguments for Open Access falls flat IMHO

 

[sprinterguy]

My wife is a Mackem, and I'm a fan of the place, but I honestly can't think of any business that has come to Sunderland as a direct result of GC running trains there (unless Darren Bent stated he'd only move to a football club in a city with a direct London train service?)

Pretty much, I mean the Vaux brewery site for instance celebrated ten years as a desolate wasteland sometime ago: Still waiting for some sort of development to take place.

 

[Max]

Hull Trains were partly set up by Anglia Railways and are now a part of Aberdeen's FirstGroup, so I'm not sure how "local" they are.

However, my main quibble is with the "direct rail links to London are an economic boost which leads to new investment" argument which a number of people trot out to defend these services.

I'm not having a go at you, Max, but since Hull Trains/ Grand Central have been running for a few years I'd be interested if anyone could prove which businesses have relocated so Hartlepoo/ Hull etc as a direct result of there being a direct train service. Companies and Government invest in new cities regularly but how many examples can be shown to have happened *because* of a train service (I mean, Nissan built a massive car plant in Washington Tyne & Wear and that doesn't even have a station)

Yes, the parent company is First, but the head office and many other departments are still located in Hull. Clearly a train service alone cannot change a city overnight. But it certainly helps to open the area up to new trading and business opportunities. Investment is far more likely to flow into an area with a superior transport network, particularly if (as in the case of many big businesses) the head office is located in London. Barclays Commercial recently relocated many of its staff from Sheffield/Leeds to Hull and I am certain that factors such as Hull's good links to London would have been taken into consideration when making this decision. The journey time between Hull and London is not drastically different to Sheffield's thesedays!

I don't think you are necessarily looking at the right kind of examples. The UK has a service based economy relying on financial and consumer services, we are no longer the manufacturing power we were and, for a variety of reasons, never will be again. So I wouldn't be expecting factories to be springing up. The Barclays example is a good illustration of the kind of jobs Hull should be trying to attract. Recently the government has hinted that it might move government departments away from London in order to cut costs and Hull has plenty of prime office space that would be ideal. But these departments are more likely to relocate to somewhere that is accessible to Whitehall.

Events such as the Round the World Clipper Race, which began in Hull in 2009, would probably not have taken place in the city had those important transport links not been in place.

 

[Kingfisher200262]

I think the Polaris stock looks really nice, hopefully they can be successful should they come about as an OAO: I would definately use them. Not sure about the 140mph working though, but the idea of creating more parkway stations is very good

The stock will be designed to operate at 140 mph, if and when the ECML / WCML is ever signalled to enable trains to operate at 140 mph, but will be optimised for 125 mph running when built. This means that, for example, only two of the three brake discs / calipers will be fitted on the bogies / axles, with the ability for these to be modified and added to at a later date.

When off the wires, diesel engines will be sized to enable 100 mph running, as lugging large engines around when under the wires makes no sense and none of the intended routes are capable of 125 mph running once the wires disappear.

As for the 225xxx Class designation, I feel this is a little dubious as it's an electro-diesel powered train set rather than a diesel electric multiple unit. Strictly speaking, they should either be Class 7x locos and coaches in the 4xxxx series, or a new multiple unit designation should be created for bi-modes.

 

[LE Greys]

The stock will be designed to operate at 140 mph, if and when the ECML / WCML is ever signalled to enable trains to operate at 140 mph, but will be optimised for 125 mph running when built. This means that, for example, only two of the three brake discs / calipers will be fitted on the bogies / axles, with the ability for these to be modified and added to at a later date.

When off the wires, diesel engines will be sized to enable 100 mph running, as lugging large engines around when under the wires makes no sense and none of the intended routes are capable of 125 mph running once the wires disappear.

As for the 225xxx Class designation, I feel this is a little dubious as it's an electro-diesel powered train set rather than a diesel electric multiple unit. Strictly speaking, they should either be Class 7x locos and coaches in the 4xxxx series, or a new multiple unit designation should be created for bi-modes.

I've often said that the IEP units should have been Class 601 and onwards. My money is on Class 93 for the locos (assuming it's not used by anything else) since they would be a.c. stock. The 73s and 74s were slotted between straight-electric 71s and 76s after all, even though they used different power supplies.

As for the service itself, good luck to them. I might even use it if I get the chance (not doing much travel at the moment, writing gets in the way).

 

[Geezertronic]

I've often said that the IEP units should have been Class 601 and onwards. My money is on Class 93 for the locos (assuming it's not used by anything else) since they would be a.c. stock. The 73s and 74s were slotted between straight-electric 71s and 76s after all, even though they used different power supplies.

As for the service itself, good luck to them. I might even use it if I get the chance (not doing much travel at the moment, writing gets in the way).

Class 93 was the designation for the Intercity 250 locos

 

[Lampshade]

Colne > Burnley > Blackburn > Bolton > Manchester Oxford Road > Manchester Airport > Lichfield Trent Valley > Tamworth > Northampton > Watford Junction > London Euston

Blue = no direct service to Manchester
Red = no direct service to London
Green = no direct service to either

 

[Pumbaa]

Watford has a few services from Manchester each day in both peaks, with 1 am peak service to Manchester.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Colne > Burnley > Blackburn > Bolton > Manchester Oxford Road > Manchester Airport > Lichfield Trent Valley > Tamworth > Northampton > Watford Junction > London Euston

Blue = no direct service to Manchester
Red = no direct service to London
Green = no direct service to either

I like it! Add a stop at my local Cherry Tree, and it's a winner! Watford may well have 1/2 peak trains to Manchester, but nowhere near enough.

Were what you listed the route or calling points?