• 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!

Future of TPE

Status
Not open for further replies.

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,333
What if you diverted XC Manchester-South Coast services to Manchester Airport and welded them onto the Manchester-Scotland services?

So XC would run Scotland to the South Coast via Manchester rather than the ECML.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,530
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
What if you diverted XC Manchester-South Coast services to Manchester Airport and welded them onto the Manchester-Scotland services?

So XC would run Scotland to the South Coast via Manchester rather than the ECML.

XC doesn't have enough stock to expand its services, and it would mean DMUs under the wires which is bad, so no. They were originally XC services, though, e.g. the Sussex and Wessex Scots.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,333
XC doesn't have enough stock to expand its services, and it would mean DMUs under the wires which is bad, so no. They were originally XC services, though, e.g. the Sussex and Wessex Scots.
Well I'm assuming XC would get additional stock given that they would be taking on more services!

In addition given that the Voyagers are getting rather worn out and were never really fit for purpose.... we could just order a nice uniform fleet of eletrodiesel 80x to replace them all and be rid of the damn things?
 

YorksLad12

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2020
Messages
2,715
Location
Leeds
I'd say Barnsley goes 60/40 to Sheffield rather than Leeds for commuting/business.

But for Leisure (mainly on weekends) I'd say it's more 70/30 in Leeds' favour.

Purely from my own experiences of travelling on the Hallam Line.
Possibly, but Barnsley area folk do travel north as well, hence it being part of the soft-boundary Leeds City Region. It's one of those "should we restore the West Riding?" issues, as that would also bring Skipton, Harrogate and a few other places back into a common travel area.

I would also leave TP as it is. Interference isn't going to improve anything at all in the short term. Wait until the franchise expires and then give it to OLR, or maybe TfN could have a go?
Less than three months then (31 March 2023)! OLR has its hands full and TfN only do strategies.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
27,284
Location
Bolton
That strikes me as an error. If Barnsley mostly associates to Leeds (I don't know it), then it needs to be in the same Governmental structures as Leeds, including and especially transport.

That Ormskirk isn't in the Liverpool City Region is similarly stupid. It has very little to do with Preston and the rest of Lancashire.
Similarly it's utterly bananas that Glossop is officially in High Peak rather than Tameside, given it has almost no connections with the rest of Derby and Derbyshire, and very strong connections with the rest of Greater Manchester. Of course this kind of is recognised in railway terms and with adult bus tickets but not child concessions or most other services (I think the fire and ambulance service boundaries put it with Manchester but it's covered by the Derbyshire Constabulary).
 

gimmea50anyday

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2013
Messages
3,456
Location
Back Cab
I...given that the Voyagers are getting rather worn out and were never really fit for purpose.... we could just order a nice uniform fleet of eletrodiesel 80x to replace them all and be rid of the damn things?
An 802 is an improvent on a voyager???... You know the trains are full of brilliant ideas but desiged poorly and the build quality is on par with Keepmoat Homes?.....

For me if TPE were to be broken up, it would make sense TPEs operations out of Newcastle were TUPE'd over to LNER, this is because they share route and traction knowledge (80x Edinburgh-Doncaster and Leeds) and the full Edinburgh- Liverpool and Newcastle-Manchester Airport service be part of LNER along with Airport-Saltburn and using the nova 1 and Azuma AT300s. This would also require some staff from York TPE to also be TUPE'd over although transferring them to Leeds would be more sensible and would be seriously considered by some of the york staff as they live in the Leeds area or may find a Leeds commute easier. reinstating York (Leeds) and newcastles lost route knowledge back through to Liverpool along with all of the diversions would instantly improve reliability along the route.
Scarborough and Hull services merged in to Northern using scarborough York Hull and Manchester crews and the existing northern depots there along with the 185s while Liverpool/Airport - Cleethorpes merged in to Liverpool-Norwich and in to EMR and deploying the mk5s and 185s.this would also give EMR a liverpool base and cut out a lot of unnecessary ECS moves. WCML services that were formerly XC routes before being seperated out and merged in to TPE should be in the hands of Avanti, again as route and traction familiarity and depot location is similar with AT300s shortly to be introduced deployed along with the existing 397s and short length 390s which could also be extended to run through to Birmingham and Euston.

Or keep TPE as it is but give the crews their route and traction knowledge back and reintroduce crew through running and depot cross-cover. That would be a sensible idea....
 

Manclad83

Member
Joined
24 Jan 2021
Messages
33
Location
Manchester
Similarly it's utterly bananas that Glossop is officially in High Peak rather than Tameside, given it has almost no connections with the rest of Derby and Derbyshire, and very strong connections with the rest of Greater Manchester. Of course this kind of is recognised in railway terms and with adult bus tickets but not child concessions or most other services (I think the fire and ambulance service boundaries put it with Manchester but it's covered by the Derbyshire Constabulary).

As someone who grew up in Barnsley but now lives close to the Tameside/High Peak border, I can tell you that Barnsley folk have little affinity with Leeds. The very north end of the town perhaps looks towards Wakefield but generally, it is more Sheffield facing. It is firmly South Yorkshire, not West. Though many proud Barnsley people would not accept any attachment to either Sheffield or Leeds…. Just Barnsley.

Glossop on the other hand is by all intents and purposes, Greater Manchester. Whilst some will adamantly say Derbyshire, local Glossopians look towards Manchester in many aspects of daily life. Even a trip to Buxton is a rarity for many, another place that looks towards Manchester than Derby.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,333
An 802 is an improvent on a voyager???... You know the trains are full of brilliant ideas but desiged poorly and the build quality is on par with Keepmoat Homes?.....
As opposed to a train that is 4x23m vehicles but still only manages 200 seats?
 

daodao

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2016
Messages
3,601
Location
Dunham/Bowdon
I would get rid of TPE and transfer its services to other TOCs as follows:
  • to Avanti WC - WCML services from Liverpool/Manchester to Edinburgh/Glasgow via Carlisle, and run them from Manchester Victoria, not the Airport
  • to GNER - Express services via Standedge from Liverpool to York and onwards to Middlesbrough/Tees-side and to Newcastle
  • to XC/GNER - local stops/services currently provided by TPE between Newcastle and Edinburgh
  • to EMR - South Transpennine services from Liverpool via Sheffield to Cleethorpes
  • to Northern - local/semi-fast services from Manchester via Standedge to Huddersfield/Leeds/Scarborough/Hull. I would start the stopping services at Manchester Victoria platforms 1/2 and the semi-fast services at Manchester Piccadilly platforms 1/2/3, with no services running through from the Airport
  • to Northern - replacement all station stopping services for the TPE services to Manchester Airport, which would terminate at the main Piccadilly trainshed
For me if TPE were to be broken up, it would make sense TPEs operations out of Newcastle were TUPE'd over to LNER, this is because they share route and traction knowledge (80x Edinburgh-Doncaster and Leeds) and the full Edinburgh- Liverpool and Newcastle-Manchester Airport service be part of LNER along with Airport-Saltburn and using the nova 1 and Azuma AT300s. This would also require some staff from York TPE to also be TUPE'd over although transferring them to Leeds would be more sensible and would be seriously considered by some of the york staff as they live in the Leeds area or may find a Leeds commute easier. reinstating York (Leeds) and newcastles lost route knowledge back through to Liverpool along with all of the diversions would instantly improve reliability along the route.
Scarborough and Hull services merged in to Northern using scarborough York Hull and Manchester crews and the existing northern depots there along with the 185s while Liverpool/Airport - Cleethorpes merged in to Liverpool-Norwich and in to EMR and deploying the mk5s and 185s.this would also give EMR a liverpool base and cut out a lot of unnecessary ECS moves. WCML services that were formerly XC routes before being seperated out and merged in to TPE should be in the hands of Avanti, again as route and traction familiarity and depot location is similar with AT300s shortly to be introduced deployed along with the existing 397s and short length 390s which could also be extended to run through to Birmingham and Euston.
@gimmea50anyday

Thank you for providing more detail about how my suggestions above could be implemented in practice.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
27,284
Location
Bolton
As someone who grew up in Barnsley but now lives close to the Tameside/High Peak border, I can tell you that Barnsley folk have little affinity with Leeds. The very north end of the town perhaps looks towards Wakefield but generally, it is more Sheffield facing. It is firmly South Yorkshire, not West. Though many proud Barnsley people would not accept any attachment to either Sheffield or Leeds…. Just Barnsley.

Glossop on the other hand is by all intents and purposes, Greater Manchester. Whilst some will adamantly say Derbyshire, local Glossopians look towards Manchester in many aspects of daily life. Even a trip to Buxton is a rarity for many, another place that looks towards Manchester than Derby.
I agree I wouldn't have made that point about Barnsley. The South Yorkshire authorities have been grouped together for far too long. I was actually agreeing about parts of Lancashire, not Barnsley.
 

Iskra

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2014
Messages
10,701
Location
West Riding
As someone who grew up in Barnsley but now lives close to the Tameside/High Peak border, I can tell you that Barnsley folk have little affinity with Leeds. The very north end of the town perhaps looks towards Wakefield but generally, it is more Sheffield facing. It is firmly South Yorkshire, not West. Though many proud Barnsley people would not accept any attachment to either Sheffield or Leeds…. Just Barnsley.

Glossop on the other hand is by all intents and purposes, Greater Manchester. Whilst some will adamantly say Derbyshire, local Glossopians look towards Manchester in many aspects of daily life. Even a trip to Buxton is a rarity for many, another place that looks towards Manchester than Derby.
If so, why are the southbound Hallam line semi-fasts packed with people who alight at Barnsley on a weekend? Many have shopping bags or have been drinking heavily, the train empties significantly here. Equally, many commute Northbound in the morning but hardly any get off at Kirkgate. I'm not disputing that Barnsley is in South Yorkshire or is its own place with a strong local identity, but the people clearly do head to Leeds in their numbers for work and recreation.
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
6,480
Location
Sheffield
If so, why are the southbound Hallam line semi-fasts packed with people who alight at Barnsley on a weekend? Many have shopping bags or have been drinking heavily, the train empties significantly here. Equally, many commute Northbound in the morning but hardly any get off at Kirkgate. I'm not disputing that Barnsley is in South Yorkshire or is its own place with a strong local identity, but the people clearly do head to Leeds in their numbers for work and recreation.
And head down south to Meadowhall where as many as 6 Northern RPIs were waiting for them the last time I was there!
 

MattRat

On Moderation
Joined
26 May 2021
Messages
2,128
Location
Liverpool
And head down south to Meadowhall where as many as 6 Northern RPIs were waiting for them the last time I was there!
Surely the solution is like how Ormskirk and Chester ate treated in the LCR. They are technically outside the boundaries, but they are still served by Merseyrail, and likely will be part of the integrated bus plan (Skelmersdale too).

And both local authorities can do that, like with the possibly planed Merseyrail meets Metrolink.
 

Iskra

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2014
Messages
10,701
Location
West Riding
And head down south to Meadowhall where as many as 6 Northern RPIs were waiting for them the last time I was there!
The Sheffield-Meadowhall-Barnsley axis was awful for fare evasion pre-Covid, so I’m not surprised. I’ve noticed a lot less obvious fare evasion since Covid though.
 

gimmea50anyday

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2013
Messages
3,456
Location
Back Cab
@gimmea50anyday

Thank you for providing more detail about how my suggestions above could be implemented in practice.
Ah, singing off the same hymn sheet then. Must be some method to our madness! logic to the lunacy! Incredulous!!!

(I keep being told off for trying to apply logic to the rail industry....)
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,057
Location
Reston City Centre
* - My understanding was that Barnsley is in both Leeds City Region AND Sheffield City Region, which makes sense for somewhere on the border, rather than a binary situation where we pretend that the town faces in one direction only. There’s clearly demand to Leeds, albeit the daft situation at Platform 17 restricts the supply of seats for Barnsley folk

* - TPE’s WCML services going to Avanti seems a no brainier, it never belonged with TPE, it was a silly compromise so that the Virgin service from Cheshire to London could have more Voyagers , back when TPE had been given the decidedly non-TransPennine routes to Windermere/Barrow to try to give the franchise Critical Mass

* - Cleethorpes though… either give it to the Liverpool - Nottingham operator (EMR) or give that operator the Cleethorpes services (plus local routes to Scunthorpe/ Grimsby), either have merits. But please no more three operators in the Hope Valley!

* - i could believe that fare evasion on the Barnsley line was bad… Maybe if the true passenger figure were known then someone would focus on the constraints that hold the route back (the aforementioned Platform 17 at Leeds, where there’s only space for a two coach Sheffield train because it has to be shared with a Castleford service… and the “fun sized” platforms at Meadowhall that really need extending but we are paying the price for the fact that the station was designed in the 1980s when passenger numbers weren’t expected to reach the figures that they did in 2019 and will hopefully reach again… eventually)

So, for me, the question is what to do with the TPE route through Huddersfield … giving it to LNER would’ve made sense other than pedants worrying about the geographic description (it’d be going “north eastern” in one direction!)… giving it to XC would make sense, maybe with them surrendering the ex-CT services to make up for it… i think that combining it with Northern would be too much (but then, how do you split Northern into two without splitting up services like Chester/ Blackpool to Leeds/ York etc or creating more services terminating in central Manchester?)
 

skyhigh

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2014
Messages
6,875
Maybe if the true passenger figure were known then someone would focus on the constraints that hold the route back (the aforementioned Platform 17 at Leeds, where there’s only space for a two coach Sheffield train because it has to be shared with a Castleford service
Platform 17 is getting extended. Work begins end of this year if I remember correctly.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,057
Location
Reston City Centre
Platform 17 is getting extended. Work begins end of this year if I remember correctly.

That’s great news, thanks for letting me know, i think that both the local Castleford services and the “semi fast” Barnsley services are ripe for extension (but the platform constraints are Leeds have sadly stymied this)

Of course, when Leeds station was being redeveloped over twenty years ago, the frequency through Woodlesford was nothing like it is today, so it was probably never on the radar
 

YorksLad12

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2020
Messages
2,715
Location
Leeds
Surely the solution is like how Ormskirk and Chester ate treated in the LCR. They are technically outside the boundaries, but they are still served by Merseyrail, and likely will be part of the integrated bus plan (Skelmersdale too).

And both local authorities can do that, like with the possibly planed Merseyrail meets Metrolink.
MCard is valid to Darton, but Darton is in West South Yorkshire (Darton is/was close to a pit and lots of the miners were in West Yorkshire after April 1974). There are also MCards Zone 6 (to Harrogate) and 7 (to Skipton) but they're not integrated into the MCard proper. Quite annoying, really.

* - i could believe that fare evasion on the Barnsley line was bad… Maybe if the true passenger figure were known then someone would focus on the constraints that hold the route back (the aforementioned Platform 17 at Leeds, where there’s only space for a two coach Sheffield train because it has to be shared with a Castleford service… and the “fun sized” platforms at Meadowhall that really need extending but we are paying the price for the fact that the station was designed in the 1980s when passenger numbers weren’t expected to reach the figures that they did in 2019 and will hopefully reach again… eventually)
Are they that small? 3-car 158s have visited in the past in normal orperations, and 4-car 158s when there were strikes on Northern back in 2017/18.
 
Last edited:

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
19,354
Location
Yorkshire
MCard is valid to Darton, but Darton is in West South Yorkshire (Darton is/was close to a pit and lots of the miners were in West Yorkshire after April 1974). There are also MCards Zone 6 (to Harrogate) and 7 (to Skipton) but they're not integrated into the MCard proper. Quite annoying, really.
Asauming that's a typo- Similarly Travel South Yorkshire passes are valid to Denby Dale (which is in West Yorkshire) and I assume (but can't recall) that similar boundary arrangements apply on the Doncaster/Sheffield to Wakefield Westgate lines. It was always frustrating that Metro and GMPTE/TfGM didn't have a similar agreement between Marsden and Greenfield.
 

YorksLad12

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2020
Messages
2,715
Location
Leeds
Asauming that's a typo- Similarly Travel South Yorkshire passes are valid to Denby Dale (which is in West Yorkshire) and I assume (but can't recall) that similar boundary arrangements apply on the Doncaster/Sheffield to Wakefield Westgate lines. It was always frustrating that Metro and GMPTE/TfGM didn't have a similar agreement between Marsden and Greenfield.
Yes, a trypo (I'll amend the original). I think it was something to do with Standedge Tunnel, but I'm not sure what the reasoning was around that. Someone will know... ;)
 

daodao

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2016
Messages
3,601
Location
Dunham/Bowdon
I thought this thread was supposed to be about TPE, not [former] PTEs and their boundaries. One thing that would not be appropriate is for PTEs (or former PTEs) to have anything to do with current longer distance TPE services. It is particularly important for TfGM not to have direct control over any heavy rail services in Greater Manchester, given its interventionist dictatorial approach.
 

LittleAH

Established Member
Joined
24 Oct 2018
Messages
1,212
I know this is a speculative thread, but where did Huw Merriman say anything about TPE merging with Northern? What was actually alluded to was OLR, presumably when TPE's current contact ends in May.
 

Manclad83

Member
Joined
24 Jan 2021
Messages
33
Location
Manchester
If so, why are the southbound Hallam line semi-fasts packed with people who alight at Barnsley on a weekend? Many have shopping bags or have been drinking heavily, the train empties significantly here. Equally, many commute Northbound in the morning but hardly any get off at Kirkgate. I'm not disputing that Barnsley is in South Yorkshire or is its own place with a strong local identity, but the people clearly do head to Leeds in their numbers for work and recreation.
I’m not disputing that either. Leeds is a destination city, but then so is Scarborough and Blackpool which are also popular with Tykes.

However, more will go shopping to Meadowhall. The borough has a considerable border with Sheffield rather than Leeds and I would hazard a guess that those residing in places like Hoyland and Wombwell are more familiar with Shiregreen and Ecclesfield than with Horsforth and Crossgates. Indeed, people in those parts of Barnsley are often sent straight to the Northern General rather than Barnsley General Hospital and where BDGH don’t have the expertise, a patient is sent to Sheffield rather than Leeds. That’s just an example of something that gives an affinity to one area over another.

But all being said, many wouldn’t like the idea of Barnsley being referred to as being a part of ‘Greater Sheffield’. Often, Barnsley folk are Barnsley first, Yorkshire second.
 

4-SUB 4732

Established Member
Joined
7 Jan 2018
Messages
2,150
I think this is easily solved, if it’s allowed to be.

The Liverpool to Leeds trunk route via Lea Green, Victoria and Huddersfield (those stations only) should be half-hourly, and every hour it should extend to Newcastle (802s) and Hull (loco-hauled).

A half-hourly service from Piccadilly to York calling at Stalybridge, Huddersfield, Dewsbury and Leeds. Hourly extensions to Middlesbrough (or wherever it goes out Teesside) and Newcastle. No idea what your best motive power is there to be honest, based on what they have.

If you’re using 7 802s on a Liverpool - Newcastle circuit, you must have at least enough for another 6 to be used on a Piccadilly to Newcastle. Then you have 6 left to play with, assuming maintenance spares. You also only use 6 loco-hauled sets on the Liverpool to Hull, so you definitely have enough for 6 on the Piccadilly to Redcar with a maintenance spare.

But, and this is where it perhaps gets interesting, put the 802s and the 68s into a separate fleet and hand it all to CrossCountry, as a signal that it is a specific set of trains that run across the Pennines that are Intercity standard. You also don’t have much reason not to if you assume you already have XC drivers at Leeds, Newcastle, Edinburgh and Manchester.

You then sensibly use the leftover 802s (5 if you have one on maintenance) for a two-hourly stopping service between Newcastle and Glasgow, with service for those new stations up Berwick side. CrossCountry drivers already do Newcastle - Glasgow anyway. You then eliminate the Voyagers and any LNER services from doing Edinburgh to Glasgow.

Flight the stopping services right in behind the Piccadilly - Newcastle / Middlesbrough services, these would have come from Victoria bay platforms (which are on the right side of the track layout there) and then, at Huddersfield, extend one an hour to Leeds (you can regulate / hold these each way at Huddersfield) and one an hour to Scarborough via Castleford. Good diversionary route retention, restore the hourly Huddersfield to Castleford, and offer Castleford a through service to Manchester and York. The second stopping service an hour between Mirfield and Leeds is an existing service from Hebden Bridge way.

That way, you’ve achieved 6tph and have got a good level of service, including having the option of viable Liverpool - local stations (Mossley, Greenfield) connections.

Hull, rightly, gets a proper express service and Scarbados keeps its through service albeit changes needed for Leeds. Scarborough as a primarily leisure flow also doesn’t require a fast Manchester / Liverpool.

Fleet wise, not sure how best you deal with the Victoria to Leeds and Scarborough services but the 20 hybrid 195s looks like a good start.

Put the Cleethorpes and Nottingham to Liverpool via Sheffield, Stockport, Piccadilly and Warrington services into East Midlands, and use appropriate rolling stock (one assumes 170s). Also offer relevant Depot access for these at existing Bombardier facilities at Crofton, and under agreement at either Allerton or Edge Hill.

You’ve also then released 185s in their entirety from the region, allowing anybody to take them on hire.

East West, with depots like Northampton already doing Siemens, seems a very good bet for them. Especially when there’s enough for the extensions towards Bristol, or Reading, or towards Leicester, or Marylebone, or wherever else you like.

The 397s, if you assume the standardised operation of them based at Edge Hill and Polmadie, are transferred into Avanti and that makes complete sense. Avanti are then offering an hourly Manchester Airport to Glasgow (I would suggest that anyway), a two-hourly Liverpool to Glasgow, and can recast the Pendolino routes. Add to that, instead of using a random 802, they can ‘loan themselves’ a 5/805 for an odd service if needed in the maintenance schedule as required.

Well, I think I’ve fixed it all, not least with the added side effects such as Scarborough train crew going to Northern (so available to be used on the Bridlington side) and then you have only minor tinkering on XC such as terminating the Southampton services at York, and focusing on the Edinburgh being an 8 car via Leeds and having the right capacity.
 

Some guy

Member
Joined
6 Feb 2022
Messages
507
Location
Preston
The 397s, if you assume the standardised operation of them based at Edge Hill and Polmadie, are transferred into Avanti and that makes complete sense. Avanti are then offering an hourly Manchester Airport to Glasgow (I would suggest that anyway), a two-hourly Liverpool to Glasgow, and can recast the Pendolino routes. Add to that, instead of using a random 802, they can ‘loan themselves’ a 5/805 for an odd service if needed in the maintenance schedule as required.
Although it would make sense it’s best for Avanti have some competition up to Glasgow and that would require training Liverpool staff all the way up the west coast which could take years and Avanti only have about 10 805s
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,530
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Although it would make sense it’s best for Avanti have some competition up to Glasgow

It has:

motorway_driving.jpg

Cars on the M6

What%20planes%20does%20easyJet%20use_A320.jpg

easyJet aircraft landing

Why don't people get this? You don't need on-rail competition. There is other competition, and it's winning because it likes to ignore that fact. The number of people driving these journeys (in particular) is so massive that there is effectively an indefinite number of potential customers to attract.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top