Extending TPE Scotland services further south

[tbtc]

(please not yet another thread about how we end to spend crazy money on Castlefield)

(Greater) Manchester-London (3 full length tph) vs -Scotland (1 half-length tph), gives a ratio of service provision at 6:1, and that's before considering the fare levels where rumour has it that London commands a premium.

Closer to 4:3

If you're talking Greater Manchester then presumably you're including Wigan (given that it is in Greater Manchester) then based on the pre-Covid timetable there were/are three trains per hour from Greater Manchester to Scotland (the "fast" Euston, the "slow" Euston and the Manchester Airport) and generally four trains per hour from Greater Manchester to London (three from Piccadilly and one from Scotland)

Greater Manchester to London also has the "slow" Euston service (which is overtaken as it takes the scenic route via Wolverhampton, so not particularly relevant) and the occasional Blackpool to London train - whereas there were some Scottish services from Manchester via York if you want to give the full picture

 

[The Planner]

It is situated on a WCML loop so very much a mainline station; it's only the lack of investment that has made it not as fit for purpose as it should be.

Saying its a loop is a bit tenuous. You could say Wolves Shrewsbury Crewe was a WCML loop, but no one would.

 

[Bald Rick]

Be interesting if that is still as true post pandemic. I think London has lost its allure over recent years.

it is. Less business travel to London (indeed to anywhere) but leisure to / from London is very strong.

I’ve seen a list of stations on the network that has London as their most valuable flow, and you would be astonished what was on it.

 

[Ken H]

it is. Less business travel to London (indeed to anywhere) but leisure to / from London is very strong.

I’ve seen a list of stations on the network that has London as their most valuable flow, and you would be astonished what was on it.

Pre-pandemic or curent, Rick?

 

[Bald Rick]

Pre-pandemic or curent, Rick?

the list was Pre pandemic, but I’d be surprised if it has changed much.

 

[backontrack]

As others have said, that goes right across HS2 and NPR.

Yes. The railway that won't be built goes right across two other railways that won't be built

 

[John R]

I think the OP's desire, expressed in a number of threads is direct trains from Bolton to the South and Wilmslow to the North. This is another manifestation of that idea.

So let’s cut the (under normal times) hourly service from the South West to Manchester, just so Bolton and Wilmslow can have some additional through services without a change at Manchester. Sounds like a compelling reason to me.

 

[Austriantrain]

Do people think there would be substantial benefit in merging a Birmingham-Manchester service with the TPE Scotland? I'm referring to the Bristol path that is currently not running but, under this proposal, the service would start and terminate at Birmingham New Street and would then form the current Scotland service north of Manchester Piccadilly. In terms of the pros and cons of the idea; it would mean TPE having to order more 397s or Azumas and either CC traincrew having to learn these units, or TPE crew having to learn the Manchester-Birmingham route, but this would at least mean electric running for the service instead of Voyagers, and also would mean the 4-coach Voyagers are replaced with 5-coach units. Castlefield should not really be a problem because of the easing of capacity brought about by the task force, but would platforms 13 and 14 at Piccadilly be suitable for handling large numbers of passengers for Birmingham mixing with the Scottish passengers?

I'll also add that this would be restoring a through service which ran for many years but was cut in the mid-2000s. Would there be a stronger benefit in providing Bolton and Oxford Road with a through service for Crewe or Stoke, Stafford, Wolverhampton and Birmingham, than with providing North Lakes, Carlisle, Glasgow and Edinburgh with a direct Man Airport service?

I have often thought that in an ideal „Takt“, you would have half-hourly Birmingham - Manchester - Scotland trains. Granted, B‘ham to Scotland would be somewhat slower than today (if they could use tilt on the northern WCML, otherwise much slower),
but that is easily compensated by much more frequent service. If these trains run anywhere near full-length, capacity and attractiveness would be vastly increased.

However:
- How to run them through the Castlefield corridor and which other trains would need to be dropped there?
- B‘ham - Warrington/Wigan would probably need an alternative and there you would have the same lack of paths (especially around B‘ham).

So a non-starter I fear.

 

[adamedwards]

I would guess the only feasible southern extension is reverse at Manchester Airport and then run via Crewe to terminate at Stoke on Trent as this uses bits of line which are less well used. This is probably only viable as a marginal time journey for the first trains north and last trains south, if, and only if, there is a market for Stoke to Scotland. I suspect not a big market.

 

[30907]

Closer to 4:3

If you're talking Greater Manchester

The brackets were deliberate, I realise I should have used GM Built-up Area (the ONS term, includes Wilmslow but excludes Wigan).

 

[Philip]

I have often thought that in an ideal „Takt“, you would have half-hourly Birmingham - Manchester - Scotland trains. Granted, B‘ham to Scotland would be somewhat slower than today (if they could use tilt on the northern WCML, otherwise much slower),
but that is easily compensated by much more frequent service. If these trains run anywhere near full-length, capacity and attractiveness would be vastly increased.

However:
- How to run them through the Castlefield corridor and which other trains would need to be dropped there?
- B‘ham - Warrington/Wigan would probably need an alternative and there you would have the same lack of paths (especially around B‘ham).

So a non-starter I fear.

This idea would not add a train to the Castlefield corridor, so no other services would need to be dropped to accommodate it.

In response to the drawback of cutting Birmingham-South West or having it starting from Birmingham, there is the option of ordering more 802s which would be suitable and could use the pantograph north of Birmingham.

The idea of not stopping at Piccadilly is perhaps too radical, but the platform 13/14 'issue' shouldn't make ideas like this a non-starter; there is a departure lounge above so perhaps this could be used as a holding station for certain busier services which have a longer dwell time on platforms 13/14, similar to the system used at London Euston and Blackpool North.

 

[MattRat]

When HS2 is operational, I doubt Avanti will still be running services on the WCML anymore, which would free up some paths to London via Birmingham. And since none tilting trains are limited to 110, that would be perfect for the 397s.

 

[Bald Rick]

When HS2 is operational, I doubt Avanti will still be running services on the WCML anymore, which would free up some paths to London via Birmingham. And since none tilting trains are limited to 110, that would be perfect for the 397s.

avanti, or their successor, sill be running both HS2 services and HS2 services. The likely service pattern is in the HS2 business case.

 

[Austriantrain]

This idea would not add a train to the Castlefield corridor, so no other services would need to be dropped to accommodate it.

It would. There is an hourly path for Manchester- Scotland services at the moment and my idea was for a half-hourly service starting in B‘ham.

 

[Philip]

It would. There is an hourly path for Manchester- Scotland services at the moment and my idea was for a half-hourly service starting in B‘ham.

Oh ok sorry, I was referring to my own idea and got it mixed up with your idea.

 

[30907]

The idea of not stopping at Piccadilly is perhaps too radical, but the platform 13/14 'issue' shouldn't make ideas like this a non-starter; there is a departure lounge above so perhaps this could be used as a holding station for certain busier services which have a longer dwell time on platforms 13/14, similar to the system used at London Euston and Blackpool North.

I thought the "departure lounge" was already used to prevent overcrowding on the platforms?
Longer dwell time is, in any case, a non-starter because of line capacity,