Potential DfT/ORR Consultation On Diversionary Routes/Rail Replacement Bus Services?

[TheBigD]

There is also a DFT or ORR led consultation in May I believe, looking at making greater use of diversionary routes as opposed to Rail Replacement buses.

The above quote (By "Mr Bun") has been taken from a thread over on WNXX about the Avanti 221s.

Does anyone know anything more about this or is able to expand upon it?

 

[geoffk]

If true that would be welcomed by passengers. Use of the Settle Carlisle line as a diversionary route has dwindled to almost nothing over the last few years. Whenever the subject is brought up with the train companies, the barriers are always route knowledge and lack of diesel traction. The latter could be overcome when Avanti take delivery of bi-mode units and TPE already has them of course. Maintaining route knowledge for crews costs money, so is DfT going to fund it?

 

[JonathanH]

If true that would be welcomed by passengers. Use of the Settle Carlisle line as a diversionary route has dwindled to almost nothing over the last few years. Whenever the subject is brought up with the train companies, the barriers are always route knowledge and lack of diesel traction. The latter could be overcome when Avanti take delivery of bi-mode units and TPE already has them of course. Maintaining route knowledge for crews costs money, so is DfT going to fund it?

Avanti do not have enough Bi-modes on order to consider sending them via the Settle & Carlisle line without passengers having to change trains at Preston and Carlisle. TPE isn't going that way either.

When the WCML is shut the ECML is open and as many passengers as possible should be directed to the other route for through journeys. Using the Settle & Carlisle line is total nonsense.

Other diversionary routes are not such a detour such as those used for ECML closures and well worth using to maintain through journeys.

 

[Horizon22]

Sometimes diversionary routes can be quite excessive and not really offer massive savings versus road transport. In other case the diversions might be perfectly reasonable and preferable. Retaining adequate route knowledge will always be an issue although most "sensible" diversions are already taken where possible.

 

[TheBigD]

Even some of the more usual diversionary routws are become harder to timetable with the gradual increase in the existing services along them.

This year's Cambridge diversions saw some southbound ECML services time for up to 2hr20m to do Peterborough-Cambridge-Kings Cross along with 20-25 minute waits at Peterborough.
Onlty a few years ago they were pretty much timed for around 2 hours.

The recent diversion via Leeds at weekends for LNER has seen 30 minute waits at York to match up the paths north and south of York.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Feb 2022 ==

If true that would be welcomed by passengers. Use of the Settle Carlisle line as a diversionary route has dwindled to almost nothing over the last few years. Whenever the subject is brought up with the train companies, the barriers are always route knowledge and lack of diesel traction. The latter could be overcome when Avanti take delivery of bi-mode units and TPE already has them of course. Maintaining route knowledge for crews costs money, so is DfT going to fund it?

In a recent thread on here about the S&C being used it was pointed out that at around 3 hours for Preston to Carlisle it was around an hour quicker to use buses down the M6 than it was to divert.

Add to that, Avanti will only have 13 bimode trains so won't have the trains able to divert services via the S&C, unless they cancel the Shrewsbury and virtually all of the North Wales services.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Feb 2022 ==

When the WCML is shut the ECML is open and as many passengers as possible should be directed to the other route for through journeys. Using the Settle & Carlisle line is total nonsense.

One thing that is needed is that where possible, the 5 car services are strengthening to 5+5car on both the ECML and the MML to accommodate the extra passengers. I rember seeing a Sunday late morning St Pancras to Sheffield service back in 2018 or 2019 being just a 4 car 222 with the inevitable result.

 

[Bertie the bus]

In a recent thread on here about the S&C being used it was pointed out that at around 3 hours for Preston to Carlisle it was around an hour quicker to use buses down the M6 than it was to divert.

That isn't true. Preston - Carlisle might, or might not, be 2 hours on an RRB but then you have the time between arrival at Preston and the bus departing and the time arriving at Carlisle and the train departing to add on. So let's not pretend RRB's are doing passengers a favour.

 

[TheBigD]

That isn't true. Preston - Carlisle might, or might not, be 2 hours on an RRB but then you have the time between arrival at Preston and the bus departing and the time arriving at Carlisle and the train departing to add on. So let's not pretend RRB's are doing passengers a favour.

The 3 hours refers to the journey time for a diverted service via the S&C, not the bus journey time.
I appreciate that my origional post didn't make that clear.

 

[Bertie the bus]

I know the 3 hours referred to the journey via the S&C. It was the 2 hours you claim for the bus I was disputing. The actual bus journey might be 2 hours, but certainly wouldn't be in the summer, but the overall journey when adding on the changes and waits at Preston and Carlisle means the difference in time will be far less than 1 hour.

 

[JonathanH]

The actual bus journey might be 2 hours, but certainly wouldn't be in the summer, but the overall journey when adding on the changes and waits at Preston and Carlisle means the difference in time will be far less than 1 hour.

Yes, but you equally have the time changing at Carlisle and Preston for trains over the Settle & Carlisle line because there aren't sufficient units to run the diversion and through services.

 

[Bertie the bus]

So that's why Virgin stopped running diversions via the S&C is it? Because the next franchisee might introduce EMUs 10 years in the future.

 

[gnolife]

I know the 3 hours referred to the journey via the S&C. It was the 2 hours you claim for the bus I was disputing. The actual bus journey might be 2 hours, but certainly wouldn't be in the summer, but the overall journey when adding on the changes and waits at Preston and Carlisle means the difference in time will be far less than 1 hour.

2 hours is incredibly pessimistic for it. I've been on plenty of coaches that have done it in that with a call at Penrith

 

[DanNCL]

I support the idea of using more diversionary routes, even when it adds potentially even 2 hours onto the ordinary journey time. Many people would prefer to stay on a direct train. It also doesn’t help that the experience on a replacement bus is usually very poor, coordination is often lacking and too often not enough buses are provided to shift the number of people travelling.

I don’t however get the obsession with using the Settle & Carlisle as a diversionary route. Whilst it’s useful for freight, in the era of 125mph multiple units ultimately a direct Carlisle - London service diverted south of Carlisle would get to London quicker going via the Tyne Valley and then the ECML to Kings Cross than any diversionary route involving the Settle & Carlisle (be that via Leeds or Preston) would get it there.

A clear path across the Tyne Valley can reach Newcastle within 1 hour 15 minutes. A non stop clear path on the ECML from Newcastle to London is 2 hours 40 minutes. Add in a 15 minute dwell at Newcastle waiting for a path, and that would be a 4 hour 10 minute journey from Carlisle to London - if two trains were to leave Carlisle parallel, one diverting via the Tyne Valley and ECML, the other via the S&C to Preston, at the time the train via the Tyne Valley reached London, the one that went via the S&C would only just be passing Stafford. Of course the main issue that would prevent such use of the Tyne Valley is route knowledge - it would be unreasonable to expect WCML drivers to learn around 330 miles of new route on top of what they already sign, so for that reason alone the Tyne Valley will likely never be a viable diversionary route for the WCML.

When the WCML is shut the ECML is open and as many passengers as possible should be directed to the other route for through journeys. Using the Settle & Carlisle line is total nonsense.

Other diversionary routes are not such a detour such as those used for ECML closures and well worth using to maintain through journeys.

There have been occasions where both the ECML and WCML have had sections closed at the same time. A few years back the Caledonian Sleeper ended up running via the Durham Coast line, thanks to ECML engineering work coinciding with a prolonged closure of the WCML north of Carlisle, if I recall correctly this was when there were issues with Lamington Viaduct. It certainly would be helpful if more coordination was made to ensure that closures did not take place on both routes at the same time unless there was really no alternative - if that means postponing non-urgent engineering work on one route as a result of an unplanned but prolonged (more than 24 hours) closure on the other route then so be it.

Even some of the more usual diversionary routws are become harder to timetable with the gradual increase in the existing services along them.

This year's Cambridge diversions saw some southbound ECML services time for up to 2hr20m to do Peterborough-Cambridge-Kings Cross along with 20-25 minute waits at Peterborough.
Onlty a few years ago they were pretty much timed for around 2 hours.

The recent diversion via Leeds at weekends for LNER has seen 30 minute waits at York to match up the paths north and south of York.

On the other hand the Carlisle diversions for LNER have generally got quicker in the last few years, taking a slightly slower path straight behind a Northern service across the Tyne Valley but then slotting directly into a path north from Carlisle without any prolonged wait. Previously these diversions regularly waited in Carlisle for 30 minutes plus (albeit slightly offset by a quicker path across the Tyne Valley ahead of a Northern service) - even on the trips that were Mark 4 sets dragged across the Tyne Valley there was still plenty of time where the set was doing nothing but waiting for a path, all work to attach/detach the 67 being completed long before the scheduled departure from Carlisle.

 

[Bertie the bus]

I don’t however get the obsession with using the Settle & Carlisle as a diversionary route. Whilst it’s useful for freight, in the era of 125mph multiple units ultimately a direct Carlisle - London service diverted south of Carlisle would get to London quicker going via the Tyne Valley and then the ECML to Kings Cross than any diversionary route involving the Settle & Carlisle (be that via Leeds or Preston) would get it there.

It isn't an obsession and it isn't about how quickly people can get from Carlisle to London. Passengers travelling from Glasgow to London make up a tiny proportion of passengers on those services and there would be absolutely no need for them to travel from Glasgow - Carlisle - Newcastle - London. They would just catch a train to Edinburgh and change onto an LNER there. Diverting via the ECML is of no use whatsoever for the majority of WCML passengers.

 

[PupCuff]

I think a lot of the issue for me is that a rail replacement bus journey can be considerably more variable in quality than the train. If there was a guarantee that the RRB would be a suitable vehicle of equivalent comfort to the train (eg something like National Express would use on their routes) then that is probably agreeable; EMR put such a vehicle out on a recent journey and this was pleasant. If it's like what GTR put out the last time I was on one where it something you'd have got to go down to the shops on in about 1995, with bits falling off it, poor seating and no air conditioning, then this is going to clearly form a really poor impression of the rail industry. The aim should be to deliver a seamless, safe and comfortable end-to-end journey experience. I get there are issues with recruiting compliant vehicles across the industry, but that's why we should be making use of diversions where they exist, so that the suitable vehicles can be left to operations where there's no alternative than bustitution.

 

[DanNCL]

It isn't an obsession and it isn't about how quickly people can get from Carlisle to London. Passengers travelling from Glasgow to London make up a tiny proportion of passengers on those services and there would be absolutely no need for them to travel from Glasgow - Carlisle - Newcastle - London. They would just catch a train to Edinburgh and change onto an LNER there. Diverting via the ECML is of no use whatsoever for the majority of WCML passengers.

I think you underestimate the number of people who do want to travel from Glasgow and Carlisle to Glasgow. It’s certainly many more than those wanting to go to Wigan or Warrington, and easily equal to those wanting to go to Preston. Arguably diverting via the ECML would benefit those travelling from places like Wigan and Warrington, as it would free up space on the trains starting from Preston.

 

[Bertie the bus]

I think you underestimate the number of people who do want to travel from Glasgow and Carlisle to Glasgow. It’s certainly many more than those wanting to go to Wigan or Warrington, and easily equal to those wanting to go to Preston. Arguably diverting via the ECML would benefit those travelling from places like Wigan and Warrington, as it would free up space on the trains starting from Preston.

No I don't underestimate it at all because unlike you I live on the line and know what the major flows are.

 

[DanNCL]

No I don't underestimate it at all because unlike you I live on the line and know what the major flows are.

I might not live on the line but I use it regularly and do know what the major flows are. And Glasgow - London is one of them.

 

[irish_rail]

There are large groups of passengers who would rather have a longer journey staying put on a train than doing train bus train. The elderly, those with lots of luggage, those with young children / babies. Its a bigger market than you'd expect. I think some enthusiasts sometimes forget it isn't all about speed all of the time.
Greater use of diversionaries is a must for me.

 

[Jan Mayen]

I see Southern are diverting Victoria-Brighton via Horsham this week. I appreciate this benefits passengers Hove to Littlehampton more than Brighton, but shows than long diversions are worth doing in some cases
Perhaps there should be a regular service from Preston to Carlisle via the S & C?

 

[dk1]

Perhaps there should be a regular service from Preston to Carlisle via the S & C?

It just wouldn’t be viable. Who would use it?

 

[Jan Mayen]

It just wouldn’t be viable. Who would use it?

It would appear the smiley didn't appear at the end of my post. I wasn't being serious. Apologies.

 

[dk1]

It would appear the smiley didn't appear at the end of my post. I wasn't being serious. Apologies.

Haha no worries. I did wonder if it was the first day of April.

 

[zwk500]

I see Southern are diverting Victoria-Brighton via Horsham this week. I appreciate this benefits passengers Hove to Littlehampton more than Brighton, but shows than long diversions are worth doing in some cases

This is also about not having enough space to turn all the trains at Gatwick/Three Bridges during the 9-day blockade of Haywards Heath. Other considerations might include that the roads in the area are regularly congested and that Gatwick and Three Bridges parking is either expensive or scarce so trying to avoid people driving to the railhead is desirable.

 

[hwl]

This is also about not having enough space to turn all the trains at Gatwick/Three Bridges during the 9-day blockade of Haywards Heath. Other considerations might include that the roads in the area are regularly congested and that Gatwick and Three Bridges parking is either expensive or scarce so trying to avoid people driving to the railhead is desirable.

And a limited number of buses /coaches available.

 

[geoffk]

Avanti do not have enough Bi-modes on order to consider sending them via the Settle & Carlisle line without passengers having to change trains at Preston and Carlisle. TPE isn't going that way either.

True, but in the fairly recent past we had Pendolino + "Thunderbird" class 57. Research shows that passengers would far rather stay on a train even if it's no quicker than changing to a bus.

 

[Falcon1200]

There have been occasions where both the ECML and WCML have had sections closed at the same time. A few years back the Caledonian Sleeper ended up running via the Durham Coast line, thanks to ECML engineering work coinciding with a prolonged closure of the WCML north of Carlisle, if I recall correctly this was when there were issues with Lamington Viaduct.

IIRC the ECML engineering work was a long-planned, massive job which would have been hugely expensive to cancel and reschedule, for the sake of less delay to a few trains carrying not that many people, while Lamington was of course unplanned. But I do agree absolutely that the ECML and WCML should not both be planned to be closed at the same time.

It isn't an obsession and it isn't about how quickly people can get from Carlisle to London. Passengers travelling from Glasgow to London make up a tiny proportion of passengers on those services and there would be absolutely no need for them to travel from Glasgow - Carlisle - Newcastle - London. They would just catch a train to Edinburgh and change onto an LNER there. Diverting via the ECML is of no use whatsoever for the majority of WCML passengers.

I also use the WCML from Glasgow regularly and would not agree that Glasgow passengers are a tiny proportion ! However I agree that should the WCML be closed between Carlisle and Preston the obvious route for Glasgow passengers is indeed across to Edinburgh and the ECML. But in the event of such a closure diverting via the Settle and Carlisle is, as others have said, a slow journey, and creates huge resource costs in terms of suitable (ie diesel) rolling stock, and maintaining Traincrew route knowledge.

 

[AndyMike]

There are large groups of passengers who would rather have a longer journey staying put on a train than doing train bus train. The elderly, those with lots of luggage, those with young children / babies. Its a bigger market than you'd expect. I think some enthusiasts sometimes forget it isn't all about speed all of the time.
Greater use of diversionaries is a must for me.

This is true - and never more so than after Christmas, when forcing people carrying gifts onto replacement buses really isn’t ideal.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

There are large groups of passengers who would rather have a longer journey staying put on a train than doing train bus train. The elderly, those with lots of luggage, those with young children / babies. Its a bigger market than you'd expect.

Or indeed anyone trying to work on the train. RRBs are not exactly conducive to getting the laptop out.

 

[Taunton]

When the WCML is shut the ECML is open and as many passengers as possible should be directed to the other route for through journeys. Using the Settle & Carlisle line is total nonsense.

Unfortunately the ECML doesn't go to Crewe, Liverpool, Preston, Carlisle, or wherever.

Strangely the S&C proved quite straightforward for some 100 years, until privatisation came along and it was suddenly organisationally too difficult. In former times of course route knowledge was maintained not by sending out special route learners, but just by having drivers handle periodic regular trains on that route as part of their link.

Having actually been diverted that way some years ago, it did take longer, much of which seemed to be accounted for by the best part of half an hour standing at both Preston and Carlisle, messing about with nothing going on. And it was still quicker than nowadays using a coach.

 

[bengley]

The thing some people here seem to be missing is even though it takes longer, the very fact people won't have to change from train to bus and back to train, potentially with luggage makes it more attractive to lots of people.