LNW Trent Valley services

[DaventryRabbit]

Rugby would be awful as a terminus, it doesn't have any bays and P5 and 6 get used all the time. Northampton does have bays.

Agreed.
There's nowhere at Rugby to turn back from the North easily since the North End Bays were removed quite a while ago.

 

[DarloRich]

This forum never ceases to amaze.

We're talking about 12 car pseudo-InterCity operation on the busiest day for leisure travel, are we not? There's a real chance this will boost use of these already popular services even further.

I keep saying the change at Tamworth has exploded in recent times. The days of just me and a few others on the platform is long gone. I don't know if it is a result of the earlier Avanti problems, cheapo fares, differing routing suggestions on planners and/or new customers but the numbers have really grown. I suspect Nuneaton is the same but have no real experience of that change.

It does feel like most passengers are going to MKC or Euston rather than intra Trent Valley journeys.

There have been many, many valid complaints in the past of London Midland running short crush loaded services at weekends and leaving stock in depots to avoid strengthening. Yet now their successor IS strengthening beyond the current booked norm, people are complaining!

Agreed - as a regular user ( several times a week at present) additional capacity is very happily accepted. Even if just for the EUS > MKC section!

 

[185143]

I keep saying the change at Tamworth has exploded in recent times. The days of just me and a few others on the platform is long gone. I don't know if it is a result of the earlier Avanti problems, cheapo fares, differing routing suggestions on planners and/or new customers but the numbers have really grown. I suspect Nuneaton is the same but have no real experience of that change.

It does feel like most passengers are going to MKC or Euston rather than intra Trent Valley journeys.

Agreed - as a regular user ( several times a week at present) additional capacity is very happily accepted. Even if just for the EUS > MKC section!

This was the 12:13 (IIRC) from Crewe yesterday. Left with standing passengers in the rear two coaches at least. Admittedly I suspect there were Birmingham passengers amongst them, but to say they are only really used between Rugby and Euston is, in my experience, pure fantasy.

 

[Kite159]

I was on the 15;32odd service from Stafford to London yesterday (lovely pair of /2s). Very busy in the rear 3 coaches (lucky enough got a seat in the former first class area) until Tamworth where it emptied out with a lot of passengers heading towards the high level platform for Birmingham (for a 45 minute wait for a voyager).

Even the 09;52 service had a good crowd waiting for it at Crewe, but remember north of Rugby those trains carry fresh air according to some

 

[Bletchleyite]

This was the 12:13 (IIRC) from Crewe yesterday. Left with standing passengers in the rear two coaches at least. Admittedly I suspect there were Birmingham passengers amongst them, but to say they are only really used between Rugby and Euston is, in my experience, pure fantasy.

The WCML was a bit of a mess yesterday and there was a lot of overcrowding, though.

I do however agree with your point - they are well used, and the complaint that they may be a bit quiet north of say Nuneaton is a bit silly, because that's true of almost any train - should we be faffing about putting 4 on/off the stoppers at Tring, for instance? Of course not.

 

[DarloRich]

but to say they are only really used between Rugby and Euston is, in my experience, pure fantasy.

I am not saying that - I AM saying MOST customers regardless of boarding point are travelling to or from Euston

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am not saying that - I AM saying MOST customers regardless of boarding point are travelling to or from Euston

I think it's fair to say that on any train service that has London at one end of it, the majority of people will be travelling to/from the relevant London terminus.

 

[DarloRich]

I think it's fair to say that on any train service that has London at one end of it, the majority of people will be travelling to/from the relevant London terminus.

agree - however people upthread are doubting that. My anecdotal evidence is offered to support my point.

 

[SCDR_WMR]

I am not saying that - I AM saying MOST customers regardless of boarding point are travelling to or from Euston

Which I agree with. Lichfield and Tamworth have as many boarding for Euston as changing for XC trains etc

 

[DarloRich]

Which I agree with. Lichfield and Tamworth have as many boarding for Euston as changing for XC trains etc

some of them are both

 

[AndrewE]

Which I agree with. Lichfield and Tamworth have as many boarding for Euston as changing for XC trains etc

but please don't forget that (apart from 1 Manchester via Stoke) these LNR services provide the only connection at Nuneaton for the whole WCML N of Crewe - and the Euston-Glasgows don't even stop at Crewe!
The service/connections are so poor that journeyplanners send you off via Doncaster or even via London - even from Chester.

 

[Bletchleyite]

the Euston-Glasgows don't even stop at Crewe!

I believe this is for capacity reasons. The service via Birmingham provides the connection from Crewe to Scotland.

 

[185143]

I am not saying that - I AM saying MOST customers regardless of boarding point are travelling to or from Euston

Apologies, that wasn't aimed at you. I'm in full agreement, though the Interchange at Tamworth in particular is not insignificant as you also rightly note.

 

[DarloRich]

Apologies, that wasn't aimed at you. I'm in full agreement, though the Interchange at Tamworth in particular is not insignificant as you also rightly note.

no problem - i was just trying to clearly set out my position. I have been quite amazed at the increase in passengers willing to change at Tamworth. Pre covid you were looked at like a mad thing if you suggested it!

 

[Bletchleyite]

no problem - i was just trying to clearly set out my position. I have been quite amazed at the increase in passengers willing to change at Tamworth. Pre covid you were looked at like a mad thing if you suggested it!

I think it's just a case of "every man has his price" - it can save a fair whack of money using the LNR services so people do!

 

[AndrewE]

I believe this is for capacity reasons. The service via Birmingham provides the connection from Crewe to Scotland.

Yes, but Scotland isn't the only desired destination, e.g. Windermere: 50 or 59 (!) minute connections at Oxenholme just when you want to get there for a day out!
For a while on Saturdays (and during Covid) there was a much better service, as the fast Londons connected at Oxenholme - quelle surprise!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, but Scotland isn't the only desired destination, e.g. Windermere: 50 or 59 (!) minute connections at Oxenholme just when you want to get there for a day out!

Yes, that's rubbish, but it'd be a lot easier to fix that by adjusting the Northern service.

 

[JW4]

Forgive me if I’m missing the obvious but what train is the “Class 9” you refer to?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Forgive me if I’m missing the obvious but what train is the “Class 9” you refer to?

Presumably the Euston-Birmingham-Scotland service which runs in a 9xxx headcode.

 

[Boodiggy]

Agreed.
There's nowhere at Rugby to turn back from the North easily since the North End Bays were removed quite a while ago.

You can turn back north from every platform at Rugby except the south facing bay. Very flexible layout with the bi-di too.

 

[AndrewE]

You can turn back north from every platform at Rugby except the south facing bay. Very flexible layout with the bi-di too.

but it's a shame that you block a through platform while you do it...

 

[SCDR_WMR]

You can turn back north from every platform at Rugby except the south facing bay. Very flexible layout with the bi-di too.

Well yes, but that isn't the problem.

Which platform do you intend on loosing for these turnbacks?

 

[Boodiggy]

Well yes, but that isn't the problem.

Which platform do you intend on loosing for these turnbacks?

It depends why you are turning back. If there is disruption further south, or just to spin LNWR service. If it is just the LNWR Trent you can work around it without much fuss. It is no different to spinning at MKC or Stafford.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Oct 2023 ==

but it's a shame that you block a through platform while you do it...

This is true. But with the flexibility of the layout you can work around without any real issues. Just need to be mindful of freight southbound if you leave a unit in P6…

 

[SCDR_WMR]

It depends why you are turning back. If there is disruption further south, or just to spin LNWR service. If it is just the LNWR Trent you can work around it without much fuss. It is no different to spinning at MKC or Stafford.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Oct 2023 ==


This is true. But with the flexibility of the layout you can work around without any real issues. Just need to be mindful of freight southbound if you leave a unit in P6…

And that is the difference.

At Stafford you can easily use platform 6 for spinning, and in fact LNWR will be spinning trains at Stafford from December.

MKC platform 2 is already used for terminating the stoppers so as long as it doesn't clash with their timings then that works.

Rugby doesn't have that luxury, unless you stopped using one of the platforms. But then it would be which one? 6 is a no due to freight traffic, 4 is for non-stoppers and semi fast services, I guess you could use just platform 1 for Northbound and Birmingham services and use 2 for spinning. It's just not ideal

 

[Boodiggy]

Usually Rugby would be P2 for spinning. Other stoppers in P1.
MKC would be P5. The clash wouldn’t be avoidable with the 2KXX in P2.
I am not disagreeing but spinning the train at Rugby is not a massive issue and the rest of the service can run without delay. As Rugby is a crew change for the TV services it makes sense to do it there.

 

[SCDR_WMR]

Usually Rugby would be P2 for spinning. Other stoppers in P1.
MKC would be P5. The clash wouldn’t be avoidable with the 2KXX in P2.
I am not disagreeing but spinning the train at Rugby is not a massive issue and the rest of the service can run without delay. As Rugby is a crew change for the TV services it makes sense to do it there.

I'm not disagreeing that it can be done at Rugby, yes it is a driver changeover there anyway on pretty much every service. I agree that P2 would be the most suitable there. I would rather not spin there at all

 

[Russel]

Has the plan for 12 cars on the Trent Valley Saturday services been dropped?

I thought it was meant to start from December, but every one I've used so far has been the standard 8 car formation.

 

[JonathanH]

Has the plan for 12 cars on the Trent Valley Saturday services been dropped?

I thought it was meant to start from December, but every one I've used so far has been the standard 8 car formation.

All booked out of platform 7 at Crewe by the looks of things, so no sign they are meant to be 12 car. The handful of platform 12 departures on the route seem to be on Sundays.

 

[SCDR_WMR]

Has the plan for 12 cars on the Trent Valley Saturday services been dropped?

I thought it was meant to start from December, but every one I've used so far has been the standard 8 car formation.

Sundays only currently, Fridays and Saturday 'may' follow

 

[Bletchleyite]

Sundays only currently, Fridays and Saturday 'may' follow

In effect they'll have to within a couple of years unless they reshuffle the plan for the 730s again. (Dropping them all to 5.730 isn't workable, they'd leave people behind all the time).