Weakest link on the intercity network

[InOban]

Edinburgh has a long tradition of frequent fast services to London and the road was poor especially north of Newcastle and so the population has been used to using the train. For a long time, until the end if the west coast upgrade, Glasgow had a slow, infrequent and unreliable service and the A74/M6 was completely dualled. People flew, drove, or took the coach.

 

[30907]

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.

But an hourly service with a couple of extra stops is better than the 2-hourly (at best) offer of IC Cross Country a generation ago.

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.

Indeed - the M1 was unusual in NOT following an established road or rail route over that section. The building of MK may have been a factor, or was the idea to provide one route out of London to the North (remind you of anything? I'm of course thinking of the London and Birmingham with a branch to York but ISTR there is a recent parallel )

Re: Glasgow v Edinburgh (1) please don't quote post-Covid timetables, they are not representative, but (2) the ECML has the advantage of serving the NE and York on the one train - Preston doesn't quite cut it (sorry!).

 

[JonathanH]

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!

It still has an equally quick train calling only at Gatwick Airport. People here seem to be upset that it is marketed as Gatwick Express but it is equally a modern link between Brighton and London.

South coast heading north is somewhat poor, cross country only direct option and advance tickets lacking and expensive.

A very many opportunities to change in London though. I appreciate that London is a bit more of a detour from Solent and Wessex areas than from parts of the south coast further east.

 

[a_c_skinner]

Are there any city to city services to be proud of when one of the pair isn't London?

 

[drb61]

I'd throw Glasgow Central to Edinburgh into the mix - one train per hour making 18 stops and taking around 90 minutes for a 46 mile journey - of little use for anything other than intermediate traffic.

OK there's a half-hourly fast service from Queen Street, but given that Central serves a larger range of destinations than Queen Street, I'm surprised there's been little push over the years for a regular fast service from Central to Waverley. Even the pre-Covid hourly 'fast' service on the Shotts route was not much faster than the stopper, even after electrification, which could potentially have made the fast service sub 1 hour with a decent timetable recast, instead of just adding padding to the diagrams to pretty much maintain the same timetable as with the diesels.

 

[Peter0124]

I'd throw Glasgow Central to Edinburgh into the mix - one train per hour making 18 stops and taking around 90 minutes for a 46 mile journey - of little use for anything other than intermediate traffic.

OK there's a half-hourly fast service from Queen Street, but given that Central serves a larger range of destinations than Queen Street, I'm surprised there's been little push over the years for a regular fast service from Central to Waverley. Even the pre-Covid hourly 'fast' service on the Shotts route was not much faster than the stopper, even after electrification, which could potentially have made the fast service sub 1 hour with a decent timetable recast, instead of just adding padding to the diagrams to pretty much maintain the same timetable as with the diesels.

Again this is a post covid service, it used to be upwards of 11-13tph between the two cities (4tph A2B, 4tph Falkirk High, 2tph Cumbernauld, 2tph Shotts and the odd via Carstairs Scotrail/XC)

Now its 6tph in total: 2tph A2B (+ peak extras), 2tph Falkirk High, 1tph Shotts (+ peak extras), the Cumbernauld service is going in May but theres 1tph of those atm (+ peak extras) and rarely any via Carstairs now.

As for Glasgow Central alone (I first misread your post), yes I agree they need improved, the Carstairs services gotta come back as they serve Motherwell and Lanarkshire, which has a poor service to Edinburgh currently.

 

[NoRoute]

Indeed - the M1 was unusual in NOT following an established road or rail route over that section. The building of MK may have been a factor, or was the idea to provide one route out of London to the North.

Not entirely, there was the Great Central between Rugby and Leicester, you can still see the route as you drive along the M1 because it follows the same route between Lutterworth to the outskirts of Leicester, plus there was the Northampton to Market Harborough line.

But a lot has changed in that part of the country since the 1960s, 350,000+ people at Milton Keynes and Northampton doubling in size to over 200,000, all well served by the M1 but unfortunately the rail network in that area has been left behind.

 

[Djgr]

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

Thanks. What's happened to Bristol? to Nottingham?

 

[Watershed]

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.

I think this perhaps an unrepresentative example. The M1 wasn't built that way to cater to massive local demand between Northampton and Leicester for example.

It was built that way because it gave a convenient way of providing a motorway link from lots of places to London at once. Effectively the M1 serves the purpose of both the WCML and MML in one, as far as road traffic is concerned.

That degree of 'catering to multiple markets at once' simply wouldn't work on a two or even four track railway with mixed stopping patterns and minimal grade separation, as is the case on most British mainlines.

 

[Djgr]

Are there any city to city services to be proud of when one of the pair isn't London?

Probably the one to be most ashamed of is the seven cities express:

Liverpool to Manchester to Sheffield to Nottingham to Peterborough to Ely to Norwich

 

[stuu]

They are very flaky. Birmingham ahs a vastly larger population than manchester for example

Only if you do something silly like compare city council areas, rather than actual built-up areas

 

[urpert]

Are there any city to city services to be proud of when one of the pair isn't London?

York to Edinburgh/Newcastle/Peterborough is pretty good…

 

[Peter0124]

Carlisle to Glasgow would have been reasonably decent pre covid, with 1.5tph Avanti, 0.5tph TPE and roughly 0.5tph Scotrail via Dumfries

 

[WesternBiker]

Thinking about it, Cardiff to just about anywhere except London/Swansea (though Swansea is no great shakes in terms of speed). On the old BR maps, the line via Lydney was shown as Inter-City in bold, but the rolling stock and speeds on services to Birmingham and Nottingham are a long way from "Inter-City" standard. The overriding assumption now is "change at Bristol Parkway".

 

[Efini92]

I saw this thread title and thought that it would be about a strongman competition between different mess rooms...

I would say that Sheffield - Manchester isn't too bad, as there are two fast trains per hour and one stopper. I always think that Liverpool - London is rather poorly served, with only 1tph in normal times.

If it was who’s your money on?

 

[NoRoute]

I think this perhaps an unrepresentative example. The M1 wasn't built that way to cater to massive local demand between Northampton and Leicester for example.

It was built that way because it gave a convenient way of providing a motorway link from lots of places to London at once. Effectively the M1 serves the purpose of both the WCML and MML in one, as far as road traffic is concerned.

The M1 opened in 1959, over 60 years ago and since then over 350,000 extra people are now living in Milton Keynes and Northampton combined, and all the economic activity, jobs, travel associated with that. Regardless of what the M1 was originally intended to do, it does now cater to local traffic travelling along its corridor between the new towns and further afield along the route.

That degree of 'catering to multiple markets at once' simply wouldn't work on a two or even four track railway with mixed stopping patterns and minimal grade separation, as is the case on most British mainlines.

Quite possibly, but bringing the discussion back to topic of the intercity network, there is now a line of major towns and cities along the M1 corridor with a lot of economic connections and flows of road traffic between them, but while the road network and population centres have changed and grown over the last 60 years, the railways in that area have not, as a result the absence of rail routes and services along the M1 corridor is a significant weak link in the intercity network

 

[bramling]

What is the weakest intercity link between two places on the network, considering capacity, service frequency, speed and size of places served?

For the purposes of this exercise, let's only consider the current network, ignoring connections that we think should exist but don't. Intercity network defined as long distance services which primarily serve large towns and cities.

Leeds - Sheffield must be a strong contender. I can't think of two large cities connected by a worse intercity service - 1 tph, 200 seats per hour, average speed about 50 mph.

I don’t know about weakest, but London to Liverpool feels a poor relation relative to other places which have a 2tph or even 3tph Intercity service.

Some of the Intercity services which have shrunk to 5-car trains (LNER, EMR and GWR) can probably be mentioned too.

 

[JonathanH]

Some of the Intercity services which have shrunk to 5-car trains (LNER, EMR and GWR) can probably be mentioned too.

Yes, but their seating capacity isn't far off the old 7-coach Mark 2 sets that Cross Country used to run.

 

[bramling]

Yes, but their seating capacity isn't far off the old 7-coach Mark 2 sets that Cross Country used to run.

That may be so, but it feels conspicuously more cramped, and doesn’t leave space for surge capacity, for example if there’s an event or such. It’s also worth remembering squeezing all these seats into a 5-car train tends to mean negatives like reducing first class.

 

[142blue]

Fishguard Harbour surely?

 

[unlevel42]

Probably the one to be most ashamed of is the seven cities express:

Liverpool to Manchester to Sheffield to Nottingham to Peterborough to Ely to Norwich

It goes through Salford.

 

[Philip]

Both Manchester and Liverpool to Glasgow and Edinburgh could be a lot better really. Liverpool has 2 or 3 tpd to Glasgow, each formed of 5 coaches; Manchester under the normal timetable has 1 train per 2 hours to each of Glaagow and Edinburgh, again only formed of 5 coaches.

The size of these cities along with the tourism and business elements means Liverpool should have a similar level that Manchester currently has. Meanwhile Manchester should have an hourly service to both Glasgow and Edinburgh, formed of 10 coaches.

 

[Djgr]

It goes through Salford.

Good luck alighting there!

 

[Gareth]

And it doesn't anyway; at least, not really. The Local Government Act 1972 was a calamity for this country, not only by significantly weakening municipal government but for all the confusion it's caused with its artificial Frankencouncils, so much so that people don't know where one place ends and another begins.

 

[unlevel42]

Good luck alighting there!

I know it does not stop at Irlam and anyway it would not be as convenient as Manchester Oxford Road for journeys into Salford.

 

[Gareth]

And Irlam is Irlam, not Salford.

 

[Western Lord]

Both Manchester and Liverpool to Glasgow and Edinburgh could be a lot better really. Liverpool has 2 or 3 tpd to Glasgow, each formed of 5 coaches; Manchester under the normal timetable has 1 train per 2 hours to each of Glaagow and Edinburgh, again only formed of 5 coaches.

The size of these cities along with the tourism and business elements means Liverpool should have a similar level that Manchester currently has. Meanwhile Manchester should have an hourly service to both Glasgow and Edinburgh, formed of 10 coaches.

And who is going to subsidise all these services carting around fresh air? Feel free to propose an open access operation to cater for the vast untapped demand.
It is a very simplistic notion to suppose that there must be demand for travel between various conurbations due to their population size. There are many reasons for demand for travel between two points, not necessarily a result of population size. Edinburgh and Glasgow is a case in point. Edinburgh is smaller but is a major tourist destination (as well as being the capital city and centre of banking). Over the past several years Edinburgh airport has steadily overtaken Glasgow airport in passenger numbers.

 

[Philip]

And who is going to subsidise all these services carting around fresh air? Feel free to propose an open access operation to cater for the vast untapped demand.
It is a very simplistic notion to suppose that there must be demand for travel between various conurbations due to their population size. There are many reasons for demand for travel between two points, not necessarily a result of population size. Edinburgh and Glasgow is a case in point. Edinburgh is smaller but is a major tourist destination (as well as being the capital city and centre of banking). Over the past several years Edinburgh airport has steadily overtaken Glasgow airport in passenger numbers.

Perhaps the Glasgow frequency from Manchester is OK as it is (every 2 hours), but with Edinburgh being this major tourist destination, the Manchester frequency could do with being increased to hourly along the WCML.

Something canny like bi-hourly 5 coaches to Preston with another 5 joining there from Liverpool, then for the other hour 10 coaches could run to Carlisle before splitting, with one half going to Glasgow and the other half to Edinburgh. With this in place, Manchester to Edinburgh becomes hourly with more coaches; Manchester to Glasgow keeps its bi-hourly frequency and Liverpool has a new bi-hourly service to Edinburgh - all this without taking up an extra path between Manchester and Carlisle.

 

[unlevel42]

And Irlam is Irlam, not Salford.

Obviously, but makes no difference as Irlam is administered by Salford City Council and has been for nearly fifty years.

 

[JonathanH]

Something canny like bi-hourly 5 coaches to Preston with another 5 joining there from Liverpool, then for the other hour 10 coaches could run to Carlisle before splitting, with one half going to Glasgow and the other half to Edinburgh. With this in place, Manchester to Edinburgh becomes hourly with more coaches; Manchester to Glasgow keeps its bi-hourly frequency and Liverpool has a new bi-hourly service to Edinburgh - all this without taking up an extra path between Manchester and Carlisle.

Thing is that the demand isn't even all week. Five coaches is more than enough almost all of the time. Blocking up stations with splitting and joining has equally bad effects on other services and capacity.