Euston to Glasgow needs to go half-hourly

[Topological]

How about this for a switch-around?

1) Merge the Manchester-Scotland with an existing XC Manchester service, but starting from Birmingham NS. This could be operated by Pendalinos to give a capacity boost to both Birmingham-Manchester and Manchester-Scotland, also releasing some much needed Voyagers to strengthen other XC services.

2) Switch the existing London-Birmingham-Scotland to run semi-fast via the Trent Valley. This could continue to alternate between Glasgow/Edinburgh to maintain existing connections but could be weighted more towards Glasgow if we think the demand is there (say 4tpd to Edinburgh, with the rest to Glasgow). Pathing up to Crewe may be challenging.....

3) The current Glasgow service can then run faster, skipping Warrington/Wigan/Penrith to take 10+ minutes off the headline journey times.

4) If needed, run an additional Birmingham-Preston stopper to maintain connectivity to Wigan/Warrington.

1) Not a bad idea, certainly avoids the criticism of diverting a Euston train through 13/14 at Piccadilly. However, you would be cutting off Manchester Airport by doing that. I suspect it would still be quicker via Manchester than the CrossCountry via Newcastle.

2) That solves the London situation well

3) I would like to see the Warrington and Wigan stops remain, they support development in those areas.

4) Yes, since you would have removed a train from the Birmingham to Stafford and Crewe to Preston sections.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Dec 2025 ==

By my reckoning, 1-3 alone needs a net extra 10-11 Pendolinos, plus 1-2 more platforms at New St, none of which exist.

Wouldnt the Pendolino be the one that does Birmingham to Scotland now? via Manchester does not add that much to the journey time that you would need more than 1 extra.

The additional London train is something this thread advocates for and therefore features in a lot of posts.

Birmingham is a bit of an issue, mostly because you now have a CrossCountry to terminate there. Perhaps it should be the CrossCountry extending to Preston (instead of Manchester) and therefore you are just swapping the traction over.

 

[Bald Rick]

1) Not a bad idea, certainly avoids the criticism of diverting a Euston train through 13/14 at Piccadilly.

AIUI The criticism isnt about diverting a London train specifically. Its about having a 260m train with single doors and long distance passengers on a railway more suited to high frequency high volume trains.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Dec 2025 ==

Wouldnt the Pendolino be the one that does Birmingham to Scotland now?

No, because in the proposal the London - Birmingham - Scotland train becomes a London - Trent Valley - Scotland train.

 

[Topological]

AIUI The criticism isnt about diverting a London train specifically. Its about having a 260m train with single doors and long distance passengers on a railway more suited to high frequency high volume trains.

Fair enough. I thought it was because London to Manchester generates a trainload of passengers from said 260m single door stock, compared to say Birmingham to Manchester which would not.

The more I think about this, the more I am reminded that HS2 is going to change everything on Manchester to Birmingham too.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Dec 2025 ==

AIUI The criticism isnt about diverting a London train specifically. Its about having a 260m train with single doors and long distance passengers on a railway more suited to high frequency high volume trains.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Dec 2025 ==



No, because in the proposal the London - Birmingham - Scotland train becomes a London - Trent Valley - Scotland train.

I am treating the London - Trent Valley - Scotland as a new train.

If you take away the London - Birmingham section then you are left with one less train to Birmingham. Birmingham is already down to 2 fast trains per hour so taking one of those two off would be bad (points about HS2 notwithstanding).

 

[Bald Rick]

I am treating the London - Trent Valley - Scotland as a new train.

Which will need Pendolinos!

 

[Topological]

Which will need Pendolinos!

To be fair the whole thread could be closed down with that one

Though the answer might be more Everos and then discussion continues...

The sending the Birmingham to Scotland via Manchester, and sending the CrossCountry somewhere out of Birmingham to terminate is possibly worth exploring though.

 

[cle]

for the Euston-Glasgow fast, I think Lancaster is essential. I would propose: Warrington, Wigan, Preston, Lancaster, Carlisle, Glasgow.

And a second service could have calls at MKC, Rugby or Crewe, and then the Lakes stations too.

 

[Manutd1999]

Which will need Pendolinos!

Not necessarily..... A top up order of Everos could be an option. My proposal would also free up TPE 802s, so some switching could be possible.

Do people from Birmingham really want the delay of having their Scottish connection going via Manchester?

Agreed this could be a tough sell. I think my proposal is better overall, but it does essentially benefit London and to a lesser extent Manchester at the expense of Birmingham.

 

[Peter0124]

for the Euston-Glasgow fast, I think Lancaster is essential. I would propose: Warrington, Wigan, Preston, Lancaster, Carlisle, Glasgow.

And a second service could have calls at MKC, Rugby or Crewe, and then the Lakes stations too.

That's pretty much the same as now minus an Oxenholme or Penrith call so not much faster. I'd take Wigan/Warrington out.

 

[lrbvoyager]

By my reckoning, 1-3 alone needs a net extra 10-11 Pendolinos, plus 1-2 more platforms at New St, none of which exist.

How about use the left over Avanti voyagers?

 

[styles]

In the near future, Lumo will be running an extra daily 5 services from Stirling to London via some major Glasgow suburbs. This could make a difference.

In less than a fortnight's time, Lumo will be running direct London to Glasgow services via an extension to their ECML Edinburgh route. Some fares £33.90. Will be interesting to see if they prove as popular as their London to Edinburgh services.

 

[cle]

That's pretty much the same as now minus an Oxenholme or Penrith call so not much faster. I'd take Wigan/Warrington out.

They are busier than Carlisle - tiny market really. A true fast could skip it.

 

[Falcon1200]

nor would the Midlands be happy about losing their direct Glasgow service.

The direct service linking England's second city with Scotland's largest city is only two hourly as it is, withdrawing it altogether would IMHO be madness!

The current service is organised as well as possible given resource and capacity constraints, at least northbound, with a West Midlands-Edinburgh service being followed by a TPE Glasgow train, and the West Midlands-Glasgow having an TPE to Edinburgh behind. Unfortunately southbound connections do not work quite as well.

They are busier than Carlisle - tiny market really.

Carlisle is always busy for the Avanti services I use, and cannot afford to be missed.

 

[lrbvoyager]

They are busier than Carlisle - tiny market really. A true fast could skip it.

Penrith or Oxenholme are in no way busier than Carlisle.

 

[NCT]

Carlisle is a takt node.

 

[The Planner]

They are busier than Carlisle - tiny market really. A true fast could skip it.

Pointless as its only 20mph through the station.

 

[jfollows]

Pointless as its only 20mph through the station.

I once used the up evening Glasgow/Edinburgh to Birmingham service introduced in the 1974 electrification timetable which trundled through the station without stopping, which was quite jolly, but doesn’t really make sense today I agree.
1M47 17:45 from Glasgow, https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...g-services-in-the-br-era.247316/#post-6182051

 

[cle]

Penrith or Oxenholme are in no way busier than Carlisle.

I meant Wigan and Warrington - the stations proposed to skip. But yes as long as the speed is so low, it doesn’t save a ton. Could that be improved like at Reading or Rugby?

Carlisle is less used than even Lancaster, as I recall - although haven’t looked at the latest figures from today yet.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Carlisle is less used than even Lancaster, as I recall - although haven’t looked at the latest figures from today yet.

Lancaster is a small place, but it's a connectional (and by car) railhead from a fairly wide area. It's a lot busier than you would think it is simply by looking at a map.

 

[The Planner]

I meant Wigan and Warrington - the stations proposed to skip. But yes as long as the speed is so low, it doesn’t save a ton. Could that be improved like at Reading or Rugby?

Carlisle is less used than even Lancaster, as I recall - although haven’t looked at the latest figures from today yet.

It could probably be increased a bit, but it isn't exactly straight.

 

[AndrewE]

Carlisle is less used than even Lancaster, as I recall - although haven’t looked at the latest figures from today yet.
But yes as long as the speed is so low, it doesn’t save a ton

It could probably be increased a bit, but it isn't exactly straight.

but it is still a key node for the people around there and others making connections. 2.3 million entries and exits - so it does need looking after - 368k interchanges.
Again I say the WCML doesn't exist just to get Londoners as far away as possible as quickly as possible. That sort will probably get a plane anyway and the rest of the country shouldn't lose out to appease that particular group

 

[MontyP]

I once used the up evening Glasgow/Edinburgh to Birmingham service introduced in the 1974 electrification timetable which trundled through the station without stopping, which was quite jolly, but doesn’t really make sense today I agree.
1M47 17:45 from Glasgow, https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...g-services-in-the-br-era.247316/#post-6182051

It would be very useful to have that 1745 Glasgow-Birmingham back in the timetable today, the last service is very early at 15:57

 

[AndrewE]

It would be very useful to have that 1745 Glasgow-Birmingham back in the timetable today, the last service is very early at 15:57

there are trains with one change though, as late as 1730 (2206 in Brum) and 1840 in at 2306...