Bristol - Birmingham is not great - given there is little in the way of rail alternative to XC - I’d certainly consider it to be the “weakest link” in the area. IMHO it’s crying out for a semi-fast service rather than necessarily an extra truly IC run.
-
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!
Weakest link on the intercity network
- Thread starter quantinghome
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
That’s due to lack of train crew there used to be 2tph to Glasgow either 1 by TPE and Avanti or 2 by Avanti in other hours. Covid has ruined it meaning the EUS-GLC are rammed
TT-ONR-NRN
Veteran Member
I’ve said to London. One train per hour to London, and formerly one train per two hours going via West Midlands, and taking a very long time. TPE is irrelevant.
frodshamfella
Established Member
anything out of Liverpool Lime Street long distance wise isn't great.
To be honest the via West Midlands journey was a good alternative, as long as it offers cheaper advances plus it's only an extra hour.
Actually Glasgow to Crewe is one we've missed, again just 2tpd and they both arrive late at night. I think the EUS-GLC fasts need to stop at Crewe especially if via WM never returns as it's essential for connectivity to places like Birmingham, Stoke, Cardiff etc
Last edited:
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
I'll nominate Bristol-Gloucester as worse, using the weak Bristol-Birmingham and the bad connection to the Cheltenham-Gloucester Intercity. There is a direct DMU but the Intercity service between these two nearby cities is weak and held back by history.
Snow1964
Established Member
It is quite surprising how few of the largest cities are linked (and I will use the urban conurbation rather than the exact city boundaries), using latest estimated population statistics I can find
1 London population 9300k of greater London
2 Manchester area 2730k
3 Birmingham area 2607k
4 Leeds area 1889k
5 Glasgow area 1673k
6 Southampton/Portsmouth 928k
7 Liverpool 902k
8 Newcastle upon Tyne area 809k
9 Sheffield 730k
10 Belfast 630k (could exclude this as not UK mainland)
11 Brighton 607k
12 Leicester 552k
13 Edinburgh 536k
14 Bournemouth/Poole 506k
15 Cardiff 478k
16 Coventry 425k
17 Middlesborough 387k
18 Stoke on Trent 386k
19 Reading 342k
20 Sunderland 341k
As an example, not easy to get from number 5 Glasgow area to 6 Southampton/Portsmouth by a frequent inter city service
The 10th biggest mainland area (Brighton) doesn’t even get what could be called an intercity service, although It does get a class 313 stopper to Portsmouth which is about as far from inter city comfort levels as you can get
1 London population 9300k of greater London
2 Manchester area 2730k
3 Birmingham area 2607k
4 Leeds area 1889k
5 Glasgow area 1673k
6 Southampton/Portsmouth 928k
7 Liverpool 902k
8 Newcastle upon Tyne area 809k
9 Sheffield 730k
10 Belfast 630k (could exclude this as not UK mainland)
11 Brighton 607k
12 Leicester 552k
13 Edinburgh 536k
14 Bournemouth/Poole 506k
15 Cardiff 478k
16 Coventry 425k
17 Middlesborough 387k
18 Stoke on Trent 386k
19 Reading 342k
20 Sunderland 341k
As an example, not easy to get from number 5 Glasgow area to 6 Southampton/Portsmouth by a frequent inter city service
The 10th biggest mainland area (Brighton) doesn’t even get what could be called an intercity service, although It does get a class 313 stopper to Portsmouth which is about as far from inter city comfort levels as you can get
Huh? I think distance has to be taken into account or the matter considered on a regional basis. It is hardly as if people need to make that journey on a regular basis.
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
Bristol 465k (that's only the city council area; Bristol Urban Area aka Greater Bristol would be 617k) seems to be missing from whatever list you used.
I think you could argue too that if Portsmouth/Southampton are close enough to be one area, Newcastle and Sunderland probably are too.
Western Sunset
Established Member
The "Inter-City" network is something of a moveable feast, and its definition has changed over time.
Could you give a source for these please, as they look a bit flaky?
WelshBluebird
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 5,591
Bristol to Manchester given that CrossCountry STILL haven't reinstated the direct services.
At least that still has its direct service though!
There are 2 northbound (plus 1 from Brum) and 3 southbound services reinstated from May. Though that's still a far cry from the pre-Covid level of service.
Yeah, that does seem odd on the face of it considering Glasgow may well have a larger conurbation than Edinburgh.
Definitely flaky -it's already been pointed out that Bristol is missing, so is Nottingham with a current metro area population of 794,000 and city council area pf 330,000. And if it is OK to combine Portsmouth and Southampton, why not Nottingham and Derby (much the same distance apart) which is claimed to have a metro area population of around 1.6 million
miklcct
Established Member
Does Brighton even need an intercity service? I think regional trains are all what it needs as it's such a small city not that far from London.
I think that only the top 5 on the above list, plus Edinburgh (due to it being the capital of Scotland) and Bristol / Cardiff (the regional economic centre of South West and capital of Wales) are worthwhile to have intercity services unless they are en-route to a service linking the above top 5. What the others need are regional express to the closest top 5.
And Nottingham. Gtr Nottingham urban area around 700k population.
Also Edinburgh on Sundays gets a regular 3tph service during the day to London on LNER, and with the combination of the odd Avanti/Lumo you could say 4tph most hours during the day. Probably the highest frequency against distance ratio in the UK.
Also I'd say the demand for Edinburgh is higher than that for Glasgow despite the population differences, and Edinburgh is better for connectivity to the north of Scotland as with Glasgow it requires a walk or a bus between 2 stations.
Sheffield - Manchester would be just about ok, if the trains were not regularly cancelled, run late, or formed of 2 coaches…
norbitonflyer
Established Member
Lincoln is undoubtedly a city, but its services to any other city are dire. Sheffield and Nottingham, both all lamppost stoppers. Peterborough, fewer stops but less frequent. London, recently improved from once a night to every two hours, but always the first to be cut.
Snow1964
Established Member
Largest UK cities 2025| Statista
London was by far the largest urban agglomeration in the United Kingdom in 2025, with an estimated population of *** million people, more than three times as large as Manchester, the UK’s second-biggest urban agglomeration.
www.statista.com
The East Midland's M1 corridor cities and towns south of Nottingham, so Loughborough, Leicester, Northampton, Milton Keynes which have great road connections via the M1 motorway but no competitive rail alternative.
And I think this route must be pretty unique because there's a rail alternative along the route of pretty much every major UK motorway, with the exception of this section of the M1.
And I think this route must be pretty unique because there's a rail alternative along the route of pretty much every major UK motorway, with the exception of this section of the M1.
They are very flaky. Birmingham ahs a vastly larger population than manchester for example
Revilo
Member
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2018
- Messages
- 346
Worcester Shrub Hill to Cheltenham/Gloucester. Only one or two GWR Intercity trains a day and otherwise reliant on a 2-hourly turbo.
zwk500
Veteran Member
As others have said, population size is not the only consideration for direct links.
Brighton used to have the train to Victoria calling only at East Croydon and Clapham Junction, run using modern stock capable of the maximum linespeed. Not what you'd call 'top-link', but still a service intended for people to move from city centre to city centre fast. At less than an hour offering all the bells and whistles may have been rather a challenge!
Edinburgh has the tourist pull plus a more affluent population that travels.
South coast heading north is somewhat poor, cross country only direct option and advance tickets lacking and expensive.
tbtc
Veteran Member
As always, there's a lot of grey areas - firstly the definitions of cities (e.g. Nottingham looks small because it's got very tightly drawn boundaries, whereas some places look bigger because they are, e.g. "Bradford" generally includes a very wide area and a few other towns) - secondly the problem with the "Intercity network" (given that BR didn't apply much consistency to what qualified - e.g. to get from Leeds to Manchester by InterCity trains you'd have to go south to Tamworth or north to Edinburgh and change!)
There's also the question of how big intermediate places are (e.g. London to Edinburgh includes a stop at Newcastle, whereas London to Glasgow doesn't serve anywhere of comparable size - same with London to Liverpool which doesn't serve anywhere major) - it's nog just about the population of the places at each end
I'm pretty unbothered about whether places hundreds of miles apart have a direct link - e.g. Brighton to Liverpool or Glasgow to Bristol - they are so far apart that there won't be many passengers on a typical day - nice if they get a direct but I wouldn't base the timetable around trying to link all of these far flung conurbations
I declare a bias, but I'd say that Sheffield to Leeds and Sheffield to Manchester are both worthy of consideration.
Sheffield to Leeds is twenty nine miles between stations as the crow flies, but there's only one "fast" train per hour (taking around forty five minutes, compared to the hour or longer that Northern services take, which means they generally get overtaken, so passengers base their journeys around that one service - I used to be a daily commuter on it, I'm using it again tomorrow) - this would be bad enough if it were just a Sheffield to Leeds shuttle - however it's the Plymouth to Edinburgh train, and the only service from the West Midlands to West Yorkshire, so would be horribly busy even without the Sheffield to Leeds passengers. Plus there's the city of Wakefield in between, which is a railhead for a reasonable area. We were meant to get an extra two coach DMU on this corridor, under the Arriva franchise, but obviously any commitments/ ambitions have been abandoned under the new public sector Northern!
Sheffield to Manchester is thirty two miles as the crow flies but the two "fast" trains per hour take little under an hour (maybe fifty four minutes on average). Capacity has improved in the last few years, as the choice between "two coach EMT 158 or two coach TPE 170" is more like "four coach EMR 158 or six coach TPE 185", assuming that both services are actually running. However the market is ripe for rail - it's hard to attract motorists away from simple car journeys but easier to provide an alternative to the single carriageway A-roads that are frequently closed in the winter months (the Snake has been closed for a few weeks now), so a better rail service could take a big slice of the market (compared to routes where you are competing with a high quality motorway network)
(Leeds to Manchester is thirty five miles as the crow flies, but has seen it's "fast" service increased from three to four to five per hour, plus 802s/ Mk5s, electrification happening, upgrades, HS2... good luck to them, I'm glad that they are seeing improvements, but all investment seems focussed on that corridor)
There's also the question of how big intermediate places are (e.g. London to Edinburgh includes a stop at Newcastle, whereas London to Glasgow doesn't serve anywhere of comparable size - same with London to Liverpool which doesn't serve anywhere major) - it's nog just about the population of the places at each end
I'm pretty unbothered about whether places hundreds of miles apart have a direct link - e.g. Brighton to Liverpool or Glasgow to Bristol - they are so far apart that there won't be many passengers on a typical day - nice if they get a direct but I wouldn't base the timetable around trying to link all of these far flung conurbations
I declare a bias, but I'd say that Sheffield to Leeds and Sheffield to Manchester are both worthy of consideration.
Sheffield to Leeds is twenty nine miles between stations as the crow flies, but there's only one "fast" train per hour (taking around forty five minutes, compared to the hour or longer that Northern services take, which means they generally get overtaken, so passengers base their journeys around that one service - I used to be a daily commuter on it, I'm using it again tomorrow) - this would be bad enough if it were just a Sheffield to Leeds shuttle - however it's the Plymouth to Edinburgh train, and the only service from the West Midlands to West Yorkshire, so would be horribly busy even without the Sheffield to Leeds passengers. Plus there's the city of Wakefield in between, which is a railhead for a reasonable area. We were meant to get an extra two coach DMU on this corridor, under the Arriva franchise, but obviously any commitments/ ambitions have been abandoned under the new public sector Northern!
Sheffield to Manchester is thirty two miles as the crow flies but the two "fast" trains per hour take little under an hour (maybe fifty four minutes on average). Capacity has improved in the last few years, as the choice between "two coach EMT 158 or two coach TPE 170" is more like "four coach EMR 158 or six coach TPE 185", assuming that both services are actually running. However the market is ripe for rail - it's hard to attract motorists away from simple car journeys but easier to provide an alternative to the single carriageway A-roads that are frequently closed in the winter months (the Snake has been closed for a few weeks now), so a better rail service could take a big slice of the market (compared to routes where you are competing with a high quality motorway network)
(Leeds to Manchester is thirty five miles as the crow flies, but has seen it's "fast" service increased from three to four to five per hour, plus 802s/ Mk5s, electrification happening, upgrades, HS2... good luck to them, I'm glad that they are seeing improvements, but all investment seems focussed on that corridor)
patrick.hearn3
Member
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2022
- Messages
- 64
When they invited responses for the reletting of the XC franchise a few years back I did a similar exercise, mapping fastest journey average speeds between each on a 20 x 20 table (I think it might have been 10 x 10? The conurbations were also slightly different as Wolverhampton was in there and sticks in my mind as having done particularly poorly.) I also recall Southampton was poorly served.
- Status