Liverpool to Hull direct train from December 2022

[dk1]

I agree. The market is mainly Leeds–Scarborough as covered by the RRNE trains in the past, many connections in Leeds. I did hear a rumour that York–Scarborough was to be covered by NORTHERN with all the other lines electrified. I think the Transpennine pre-covid timetable was developed with a consistent Manchester Victoria (fast) to York 15–min frequency in mind but current proposals will drop this anyway.

Northern where going to provide a York shuttle in addition to the TPx service but it never really got off the starting blocks.

I just look at it that York will still have an hourly direct service through to Liverpool & I personally would consider Hull more important than Scarborough

 

[James90012]

Has anyone found a link to the consultation document? The same thread on Twitter has a timetable attached but I can't find the formal consultation.

 

[mike57]

I dont know if the Newcastle TPE service are going back to 2 tph, but if they do you could argue that one of these should pick up the local stations between Leeds and Manchester, as at least there is one fast service per hour.

To be honest York Scarborough has been far more reliable since it became a shuttle, and I now think we (Scarborough) passengers are better served by it remaining a shuttle with a change in York, as a lot of the time you have to change there anyway. It also avoids the issues described in post #30 (Note the only short bits of 'single track' are the junction immediately east of York and Malton station which only has one one platform although there is a second track which can be used by non stopping westbound trains)

 

[dk1]

I dont know if the Newcastle TPE service are going back to 2 tph, but if they do you could argue that one of these should pick up the local stations between Leeds and Manchester, as at least there is one fast service per hour.

The now delayed ECML timetable shew LNER as having the extra paths rather than TPx with the second Newcastle service being spun at York instead.

 

[mike57]

The now delayed ECML timetable shew LNER as having the extra paths rather than TPx with the second Newcastle service being spun at York instead.

In which case in my view that should be the one to pick up the extra stops.

 

[Asmo]

Has anyone found a link to the consultation document? The same thread on Twitter has a timetable attached but I can't find the formal

The railfuture.org.uk site flags the consultation but as yet there is no link to further information as there is for other consultations on the site.

 

[frodshamfella]

Liverpool to Hull at least satisfies the government's objective to connect the M62 corridor cities albeit its not at all the all singing and dancing Northern Powerhouse project.

As they are both ports maybe there is some demand between the two cities.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Dec 2021 ==

The M62 starts in Manchester and ends in Leeds for all the government knows.

Whereas it actually starts in Liverpool, then stops when it meets the M60, then restarts, and ends near North Cave east of Goole.

 

[ABB125]

Whereas it actually starts in Liverpool, then stops when it meets the M60, then restarts, and ends near North Cave east of Goole.

We'll clearly the government doesn't realise, otherwise NPR would stop on the edge of Manchester, use existing lines within the city centre, then new buil again a couple of miles out!

Back on topic, is there anywhere I can find out exactly what the changes are going to be?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Whereas it actually starts in Liverpool, then stops when it meets the M60, then restarts, and ends near North Cave east of Goole.

That is a purely technical point, and indeed before completion of the missing bit of the M60 it was numbered M62 throughout (with the "bottom bit" of the M60 being the M63).

 

[Greybeard33]

Has anyone found a link to the consultation document? The same thread on Twitter has a timetable attached but I can't find the formal consultation.

The indicative timetable attached to the Twitter thread shows the Scarborough - Piccadilly services calling at Slaithwaite, Marsden, Greenfield and Mossley in the standard hour. This would give those stations 2tph all day, rather than just in the peaks as per the Manchester Recovery Task Force timetable consultation.

 

[js1000]

Yes I don't necessarily disagree with any of that. But the point remains they shouldn't be part of TPE. Yes, in the reality we find ourselves in they are and that seems to be the only vaguely sensible way of doing so. But they shouldn't be and the fact that they have to be causes problems for TPE trying to serve the markets that they actually should be serving. Someone on North TPE ends up having to have a slower journey time because one of the end destinations (Hull, Scarborough, Middlesbrough/Redcar, Newcastle) has to pick up local intermediate stops because at the moment there's no other way of doing so. My local TPE service (Redcar - Manchester Airport) has a call at Gatley down at the Manchester end. There's no real reason for Gatley to get calls on TPE services going through to Leeds, York and Middlesbrough. But I bet it's the only way of maintaining the service at Gatley.

The 5 stations on the Styal Line have suffered since the May 2018 timetable debacle when the Crewe to Manchester service was extended to Liverpool and timetable frequencies completely lop-sided. The Gatley call on TPE is wholly justified even though many complain about the many intermediate stops on east-west TPE services.

From December 2022, it will effectively revert back to pre-May 2018 with a half hourly frequency. There will be some peak calls for other Northern services, TPE and TfW services. All in all, skip-stopping on the Styal Line has been a wasteful 4 and a half year experiment.

 

[LittleAH]

In which case in my view that should be the one to pick up the extra stops.

As they will be 802s, that won't happen.

Northern where going to provide a York shuttle in addition to the TPx service but it never really got off the starting blocks.

Issue is whether that branch can justify 2tph. Hull certainly could potentially but it's a difficult one - in summer most certainly. But in January?

 

[childwallblues]

Historical note: long before Liverpool-Scarborough existed, the original TP units operated Liverpool-Hull.

Spot on. I can remember the Hull trains in steam days passing through Broad Green Station hauled by Farnley Junction Black 5s and Jubilees. Replacement with Trans-Pennine diesels specially built for the route was not appreciated by the local spotters.

 

[Grimsby town]

As they will be 802s, that won't happen.

Issue is whether that branch can justify 2tph. Hull certainly could potentially but it's a difficult one - in summer most certainly. But in January?

Haxby station appears to actually making progress finally with a location recently decided on. That should make a second service from York to Scarborough a more viable proposition.

 

[frodshamfella]

That is a purely technical point, and indeed before completion of the missing bit of the M60 it was numbered M62 throughout (with the "bottom bit" of the M60 being the M63).

Yes I remember that. Its rather odd now having two sections of the M62

 

[adrock1976]

I dont know if the Newcastle TPE service are going back to 2 tph, but if they do you could argue that one of these should pick up the local stations between Leeds and Manchester, as at least there is one fast service per hour.

To be honest York Scarborough has been far more reliable since it became a shuttle, and I now think we (Scarborough) passengers are better served by it remaining a shuttle with a change in York, as a lot of the time you have to change there anyway. It also avoids the issues described in post #30 (Note the only short bits of 'single track' are the junction immediately east of York and Malton station which only has one one platform although there is a second track which can be used by non stopping westbound trains)

When both myself and my partner visited Filey back in May, we both found that the then York - Scarborough shuttle was reliable with no delays. Perhaps this should become permanent?

Although my next point may be better in the Manchester Taskforce thread, I would briefly like to mention that the now truncated York - Victoria should be sent westwards to Wigan North Western via Atherton (or somewhere not too far away to a station with platforms out of the way/buffer stops) so as to avoid having another diesel train terminating at Manchester Victoria due to the low roof there.

 

[Asmo]

Link to consultation invitation.

https://www.liverpoolchamber.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Dec-22-Manchester-Liverpool-Hull-Scarborough-consultation-updated-FINAL.pdf

 

[Gareth]

Makes sense to me. Hull's one of the North's large cities and a Liverpool-Hull could compliment the Liverpool-Newcastle as TPE's flagship service. The downside is only 1tph between Liverpool & York but I can live with it.

 

[Greybeard33]

Link to consultation invitation.

https://www.liverpoolchamber.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Dec-22-Manchester-Liverpool-Hull-Scarborough-consultation-updated-FINAL.pdf

Interestingly, the wording of this version of the consultation document differs from that previously leaked on Twitter: https://twitter.com/philatrail/status/1466069808391376896
Regarding the proposed Scarborough - Piccadilly service, that version listed the calls as including Slaithwaite, Marsden, Greenfield and Mossley, whereas this "updated-FINAL" version says:

o Calling at Seamer, Malton, York, Garforth, Leeds, Huddersfield, Stalybridge and Manchester Piccadilly
o Additional calls at Slaithwaite, Marsden, Greenfield and Mossley will be made during the AM and PM peaks only as per the current calls in the Hull to/from Manchester Piccadilly service

Also the Tweeted version of the standard hour timetable, https://twitter.com/philatrail/status/1466155163887017991, included calls at those four stations, whereas this updated version omits them (although with no reduction in end to end journey time) and has the following paragraph added:

For calls at Slaithwaite, Marsden, Greenfield and Mossley it is proposed that the current service pattern of two trains per hour in peak periods and one train per hour off peak is maintained in the Scarborough to/from Manchester Piccadilly service at December 2022. In other words, not adding local calls at stations between Huddersfield and Manchester during the off-peak that were over and above the December 2019 timetable. This is to manage capacity, protect performance and maintain the journey time of the current Hull to/from Manchester Piccadilly service and future Scarborough to/from Manchester Piccadilly service.

 

[Halish Railway]

It’s good to see that the Manchester-bound train departs Malton 12 minutes before the Scarborough-bound train, that way the train that is significantly more likely to be delayed can’t delay the other, unless it is running over 45 minutes late.

Also there is 52 minutes in the WTT to turn the train around at Scarborough so that should absorb any delays.

 

[Gerald Fiennes]

Makes sense to me. Hull's one of the North's large cities and a Liverpool-Hull could compliment the Liverpool-Newcastle as TPE's flagship service. The downside is only 1tph between Liverpool & York but I can live with it.

Yes, Hull is a large city but it has not generated in recent decades as large a volume of pax as the Leeds to York section does: could be the range of connections from York (Northallerton? Scarborough?) or just that York is a more rail-orientated market? As noted up-thread, the issue is the capacity available for running fast and slow trains on most of the TPE route sections is very limited -- if this was the Netherlands these sections would be four tracked or grade separated... -- so all options will involve significant compromises (including on choice of stations in Manchester). The one that might be explored further is that of flighting fasts from Leeds to MCV/LIV (and perhaps cutting them to 3tph but making them longer) and leaving c.30 mins of the clock face for stopping trains (and freight, which are almost impossible to route at present). Leeds - Manchester would then no longer have the regular 15 min cycle, but might perhaps get a slighly more deliverable overall package? Another way of trying to achieve an (impossible) balance.

 

[mike57]

When both myself and my partner visited Filey back in May, we both found that the then York - Scarborough shuttle was reliable with no delays. Perhaps this should become permanent?

I agree, although I travel to the NW on occasions, athough less so than pre Covid.

• It addresses the problem of movements across the throats of York station as the shuttle uses Platforms 2/4 at York
• Scarborough - York reliability is improved, and no excuse for it slip
• Pathing issues through the single platform at Malton are easier to manage
• Connections at Seamer with trains toward Bridlington are easier to maintain
• If you need Manchester Piccadilly/Airport you have to change anyway
• One less service through the congested Leed Manchester corridor

As @Gerald Fiennes mentioned I do wonder why the maximum train length on TPE is 6 carriages, and most services fall short of this. What is the maximum platform length on the core Newcastle - Manchester - Liverpool route assuming only major stops are served? Surely a quick win would be to increase train lengths rather than frequency, and the recent upgrade to the TPE fleet would have been the ideal time to address this. Instead of 4 tph York Manchester reduce it 3tph 7/8 carriage trains, adding a 4th service at Leeds going to and from Hull, much like it was pre 2016. It would also be cheaper to deliver and have the same capacity hourly as the current and previous (2018) "Lets see how much we can cram through" timetable proposals. TPE York/Hull Manchester services would only call at Leeds and Huddersfield Between York/Selby and Manchester. The Hull service could follow as the next path following a Liverpool service, giving a quick same platform change at Huddersfield for Piccadilly assuming the Hull service goes via Guide Bridge. (and just ahead eastbound, with the same easy change at Huddersfield). The stopping services could then be allocated suitable rolling stock (185s?), and there would roughly two 20min and one 15min interval between fast services each hour to thread them through.

No through airport services, everything either goes via Guide Bridge to low numbered Pic platforms or Liverpool via Victoria. Castlefield is just another bottleneck that can and should be avoided by TPE North services

I dont think the Hull - Liverpool market is significant or ever will be, but I think Hull travellers want a decent Manchester service, limited stop, and comfortable.

 

[frodshamfella]

Makes sense to me. Hull's one of the North's large cities and a Liverpool-Hull could compliment the Liverpool-Newcastle as TPE's flagship service. The downside is only 1tph between Liverpool & York but I can live with it.

I used to visit Hull quite often for business, so a direct Liverpool to Hull link I'd have jumped at. The drive is quite torturous.

 

[Gareth]

I dont think the Hull - Liverpool market is significant or ever will be, but I think Hull travellers want a decent Manchester service, limited stop, and comfortable.

I don't understand the objection. The Liverpool services have to go somewhere and if it isn't Hull, it's going to be Scarborough, Redcar or Newcastle. The only thing against Hull is maintaining a near clockface 2tph Liverpool-York & 4tph Manchester-York. However, if the idea is to make a more "intercity" style service complimented by slightly slower services, then barring 2tph to Newcastle, which doesn't look like it'll be making a return post-revolution, Hull is the natural candidate.

Also, I find the "everyone wants to go to Manchester and no one to Liverpool" trope annoying. Manchester is closer to Hull, so will naturally have more demand but then Leeds is closer again and it's likely demand to that city is higher than Manchester. No one would say the existence of Leeds makes direct Hull-Manchester services pointless though. Regardless, it's not primarily about end to end pax.

 

[Djgr]

I don't understand the objection. The Liverpool services have to go somewhere and if it isn't Hull, it's going to be Scarborough, Redcar or Newcastle. The only thing against Hull is maintaining a near clockface 2tph Liverpool-York & 4tph Manchester-York. However, if the idea is to make a more "intercity" style service complimented by slightly slower services, then barring 2tph to Newcastle, which doesn't look like it'll be making a return post-revolution, Hull is the natural candidate.

Also, I find the "everyone wants to go to Manchester and no one to Liverpool" trope annoying. Manchester is closer to Hull, so will naturally have more demand but then Leeds is closer again and it's likely demand to that city is higher than Manchester. No one would say the existence of Leeds makes direct Hull-Manchester services pointless though. Regardless, it's not primarily about end to end pax.

Certainly Scarborough is not a common destination of choice from Liverpool.

 

[py_megapixel]

And we await the howls of protest from Scarborough and surrounding about an even slower service to Manchester.

I doubt there will be that many howls of protest if it means an end to 68s running to Scarborough. The local residents have been complaining about the veritable racket they produce since introduction.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Certainly Scarborough is not a common destination of choice from Liverpool.

I think if you asked the people of Liverpool what they wanted it would probably be two Newcastles. Though obviously you don't just ask the population of one city.

 

[Gareth]

More people from Liverpool would probably use a through train to Newcastle than any of the other places, that's true but with 2tph to Newcastle seemingly not on the agenda, Hull probably makes sense.

 

[modernrail]

Hull rather than Scarborough makes a lot of sense to me.

I am getting rather lost with where TP is heading in general with its routes though. There is this change and I now see they are going to run a Newcastle to Edinburgh stopper. Something you would have thought is more of a Northern or Scotrail job. Does this mean that regular direct express Edinburgh services from the TP core are not happening? A shame if so as Huddersfield/Leeds to Edinburgh would have been a genuinely useful service.

I looked for tomorrow and there seems to be just 1 direct service Huddersfield Edinburgh.

 

[Fokx]

Of the 6 passengers I’ve just picked up on a late night Hull train (20.08), 3 were travelling to Liverpool (not together) and it’s certainly not uncommon. It’s the destination I see most often with the exception of Leeds, York and Manchester (Newcastle a close fourth)