December 2025 East Coast Timetable

[H F Stephens]

The timetable provides at least two trains per hour:

(Image shows actual schedule separation between two (practically adjacent) ECML stations.)

 

[800Travel]

The timetable provides at least two trains per hour:

(Image shows actual schedule separation between two (practically adjacent) ECML stations.)

2 trains within 4 minutes, nothing for 56, 2 trains within 1 minute. Durham really got the short end of the stick!

 

[dk1]

2 trains within 4 minutes, nothing for 56, 2 trains within 1 minute. Durham really got the short end of the stick!

But do they depart better spaced at 02, 27 & 40 for most of the day with an occasional 33 thrown in too?

 

[Segedunum]

But do they depart better spaced at 02, 27 & 40 for most of the day with an occasional 33 thrown in too?

Even in the evening, services depart at 20:04, 20:30, 20:58, 21:02, 21:58, 21:59, 22:24, 22:41. There's that one awkward gap but nothing runs south at all in it, so its not like Durham is being skipped.

 

[dk1]

Even in the evening, services depart at 20:04, 20:30, 20:58, 21:02, 21:58, 21:59, 22:24, 22:41. There's that one awkward gap but nothing runs south at all in it, so its not like Durham is being skipped.

Thanks. Thats what I thought. Not bad service at all.

There is also nothing else going in the up direction to Darlington or York from Newcastle in between those times so im confused as to why Durham is being singled out.

 

[mernrith]

From Durham, midday departures to Newcastle are at 07,20,24 and bi-hourly 11. Hard to say that's good if I arrive at the latter half of the hour, the bus could get me to Newcastle before the train does.

 

[Bald Rick]

Hard to say that's good if I arrive at the latter half of the hou….

There’s an easy way to avoid that…

 

[Class 170101]

28.8% growth year on year from Newcastle is very impressive with its three LNER services each hour to/from Kings Cross.

Not sure how that 28% been measured. the 3tph you refer to has only been in operation for less than 3 months. Surely most of that is applicable to the previous timetable (around 9 months).

It’s been extremely successful performance wise from what I have witnessed. For me connections at Peterborough are much improved and direct services north of Edinburgh are back after being absent for many years.

Depends who you hear from. PPM wise its doesn't seem too bad but Right Time is rather less rosy.

 

[A S Leib]

There’s an easy way to avoid that…

I'm not familiar enough with Durham bus timetables to say how many bus routes don't give you that choice (or that of a better connection to Newcastle elsewhere).

 

[Nottingham59]

Network Rail spent a lot of time and money ensuring it would work.

The amount of briefing, assurance, testing and resilience put into it was massive. From rosters, logistics, track access, asset management etc. it was quite the project.

Can anyone say how many freight paths were squeezed out of the timetable in order to make it work?

 

[dk1]

Not sure how that 28% been measured. the 3tph you refer to has only been in operation for less than 3 months. Surely most of that is applicable to the previous timetable (around 9 months).


Depends who you hear from. PPM wise its doesn't seem too bad but Right Time is rather less rosy.

It states in the first two months since the timetable was launched compared to the same two months last year. Other than that I’m confused by what you mean.

 

[Bald Rick]

Can anyone say how many freight paths were squeezed out of the timetable in order to make it work?

I can. None.

 

[43 302]

I can. None.

And lots have been squeezed in during week 2 & 3.

 

[NCT]

Can anyone say how many freight paths were squeezed out of the timetable in order to make it work?

I can. None.

It all happened very reactively. The concept timetable structure didn't make sufficient allowance for freight, and were it not for heroic efforts of certain individuals drafted in at the last minute, the answer could have been very different.

 

[High Dyke]

One interesting change with the new timetable, as I found this morning, is that the Up Hull Executive (for those with a long memory) is booked to arrive at King's Cross in platform 10. As I discussed with the driver, it's like arriving in a different station. The service is booked for a 5-car.

Also spotted the 16:41 arrival from York is booked into P10, then empty stock to Bowes Park loop.


Image. LNER train in platform ten at London King's Cross.

 

[Twingo37175]

One interesting change with the new timetable, as I found this morning, is that the Up Hull Executive (for those with a long memory) is booked to arrive at King's Cross in platform 10. As I discussed with the driver, it's like arriving in a different station. The service is booked for a 5-car.

Also spotted the 16:41 arrival from York is booked into P10, then empty stock to Bowes Park loop.

View attachment 199448
Image. LNER train in platform ten at London King's Cross.

There is similar on a Sunday (not looked on Saturday). In a few weeks I am returning on the 11.43 to York on Sunday morning which is also P10 (having come in from the depot).

 

[Deerfold]

One interesting change with the new timetable, as I found this morning, is that the Up Hull Executive (for those with a long memory) is booked to arrive at King's Cross in platform 10. As I discussed with the driver, it's like arriving in a different station. The service is booked for a 5-car.

Also spotted the 16:41 arrival from York is booked into P10, then empty stock to Bowes Park loop.

View attachment 199448
Image. LNER train in platform ten at London King's Cross.

Today, at least, it goes out at 1040 to Harrogate (looks to on another couple of days I've looked, too).
The 1641 from York arrives on 10 before moving to platform 8, via Bowes Park loop, and then on to Middlesborough at 1845.

 

[800001]

Today, at least, it goes out at 1040 to Harrogate (looks to on another couple of days I've looked, too).
The 1641 from York arrives on 10 before moving to platform 8, via Bowes Park loop, and then on to Middlesborough at 1845.

They've been using 9 and 10 ever since they started going to Middlesbrough a few years ago.

 

[Class 170101]

28.8% growth year on year from Newcastle is very impressive with its three LNER services each hour to/from Kings Cross.

It states in the first two months since the timetable was launched compared to the same two months last year. Other than that I’m confused by what you mean.

Your post refers to 28% year on year growth highlighted above but clearly given that the new timetable has only been around for 2 to 3 months I don't see how that can be mainly down to the new timetable, its not been operating for a year yet never mind totally, still some trains missing from the TT.

 

[John R]

Your post refers to 28% year on year growth highlighted above but clearly given that the new timetable has only been around for 2 to 3 months I don't see how that can be mainly down to the new timetable, its not been operating for a year yet never mind totally, still some trains missing from the TT.

I expect they have compared the 4 week reporting periods since the change with the equivalent 4 week periods in the prior year.

If the timetable has been a success then you would expect those percentage increases to be much higher than the ones immediately prior to the change, which would reflect more general growth (if any) of passenger numbers.

 

[leightonbd]

Having just travelled, can I just say how excellent it is to have 1930 and 2003 departures from Kings Cross to Edinburgh. Makes all the difference not to have to rush quite so much at the end of a full working day in London.

I always said that a train in this slot would harm demand for the Lowlander sleeper to Edinburgh (certainly it does for me) - will be interested to see if there is any impact.

 

[FlybeDash8Q400]

Having just travelled, can I just say how excellent it is to have 1930 and 2003 departures from Kings Cross to Edinburgh. Makes all the difference not to have to rush quite so much at the end of a full working day in London.

Certainly up until now, that 2003 (1S32) has been extremely quiet up to Edinburgh. Only seems to be busy whenever Newcastle United are playing an evening match.

I’m sure as the busier period comes along, it will pick up a bit. The Lumo leaving London at 2030 is considerably busier to Edinburgh, so it must be a pricing issue.

 

[NCT]

Certainly up until now, that 2003 (1S32) has been extremely quiet up to Edinburgh. Only seems to be busy whenever Newcastle United are playing an evening match.

I’m sure as the busier period comes along, it will pick up a bit. The Lumo leaving London at 2030 is considerably busier to Edinburgh, so it must be a pricing issue.

A journey time issue too I suspect. The 2003 is a slow train, which gets into Edinburgh only 4 minutes before the 2030 Lumo. Especially if Lumo prices itself competitively you'd save that extra half hour to yourself or just have a pint at the Parcel's Yard.

The Edinburgh end of the 2003 depends on non-London passengers to be filled.

 

[driverd]

So as a frequent user of the ECML, and in particular the Leeds service, I must say this recast seems to heavily disrupt the Yorkshire services for very marginal gains elsewhere in the country.

Lets start with capacity. At Leeds, we've moved from regular 9 or 10 coach trains, to frequent 5 or 7 coach formations. As a "turn up and go" user for work, I have stood on near every mk4 set I've travelled on. It really rubs salt in the wound when observing the poor use of unit resource, eating up station capacity across Yorkshire. Turn around dwell at both Leeds and Bradford is now near 2 hours, not just depriving the user of the capacity that unit could be providing in traffic, but also eating up station capacity at one of the busiest stations in the north.

Then there's reliability. Owing to the decision to move the southbound departures 5 minutes earlier, the xx40 departure frequently misses its path at Doncaster owing to catching up the xx20 NT stopper. This results in delays along the ECML, which proceeds to break the few remaining viable connections (eg: Grantham to Nottingham) that haven't already been sacraficed.

In my experience, this is a very London centric timetable. It feels to have been launched for commercial reasons rather than meeting the needs of all customers.

The overall experience is a half-baked solution to a very ambitious timetable proposal from almost a decade ago, realising only a handful of the targets on the original wish list and to the detriment of more than just a handful of users.

 

[NCT]

So as a frequent user of the ECML, and in particular the Leeds service, I must say this recast seems to heavily disrupt the Yorkshire services for very marginal gains elsewhere in the country.

Lets start with capacity. At Leeds, we've moved from regular 9 or 10 coach trains, to frequent 5 or 7 coach formations. As a "turn up and go" user for work, I have stood on near every mk4 set I've travelled on. It really rubs salt in the wound when observing the poor use of unit resource, eating up station capacity across Yorkshire. Turn around dwell at both Leeds and Bradford is now near 2 hours, not just depriving the user of the capacity that unit could be providing in traffic, but also eating up station capacity at one of the busiest stations in the north.

Then there's reliability. Owing to the decision to move the southbound departures 5 minutes earlier, the xx40 departure frequently misses its path at Doncaster owing to catching up the xx20 NT stopper. This results in delays along the ECML, which proceeds to break the few remaining viable connections (eg: Grantham to Nottingham) that haven't already been sacraficed.

In my experience, this is a very London centric timetable. It feels to have been launched for commercial reasons rather than meeting the needs of all customers.

The overall experience is a half-baked solution to a very ambitious timetable proposal from almost a decade ago, realising only a handful of the targets on the original wish list and to the detriment of more than just a handful of users.

Interesting observations. This accords with my own view of the timetable. As for commercial reasons - I put it down to inertia (this is how we've always done things) - it's not as though a more connection focused approach would have been less commercial successful (I've looked at the numbers).

 

[D1537]

So as a frequent user of the ECML, and in particular the Leeds service, I must say this recast seems to heavily disrupt the Yorkshire services for very marginal gains elsewhere in the country.

Lets start with capacity. At Leeds, we've moved from regular 9 or 10 coach trains, to frequent 5 or 7 coach formations. As a "turn up and go" user for work, I have stood on near every mk4 set I've travelled on. It really rubs salt in the wound when observing the poor use of unit resource, eating up station capacity across Yorkshire. Turn around dwell at both Leeds and Bradford is now near 2 hours, not just depriving the user of the capacity that unit could be providing in traffic, but also eating up station capacity at one of the busiest stations in the north.

Then there's reliability. Owing to the decision to move the southbound departures 5 minutes earlier, the xx40 departure frequently misses its path at Doncaster owing to catching up the xx20 NT stopper. This results in delays along the ECML, which proceeds to break the few remaining viable connections (eg: Grantham to Nottingham) that haven't already been sacraficed.

In my experience, this is a very London centric timetable. It feels to have been launched for commercial reasons rather than meeting the needs of all customers.

The overall experience is a half-baked solution to a very ambitious timetable proposal from almost a decade ago, realising only a handful of the targets on the original wish list and to the detriment of more than just a handful of users.

Indeed. A year-on-year increase of 28% at Newcastle is pretty good, but I'd like to see the figures from Leeds, Wakefield, Durham, Berwick, Grantham etc.

 

[ST156]

The pre-December timetable base, which had followed the same core structure since May 2011, had so many strengths and provided such a well-balanced (and generally reliable!) service, that any drop in frequency/capacity will not go unnoticed.

While I'm sure the December change better reflects overall demand and is indeed a positive step, it replaced what had been a "good all round" timetable plan for many years.

 

[H F Stephens]

Indeed. A year-on-year increase of 28% at Newcastle is pretty good, but I'd like to see the figures from Leeds, Wakefield, Durham, Berwick, Grantham etc.

Indeed, indeed.

Confirmation of the exact periods for the compared is essential, to assess to what extent either or both periods were or were not affected by any planned or unplanned disruptions.

For example, Storm Eowyn affected parts of the ECML on and after 24th January 2025.

London King's Cross was closed (planned) on the 25th and 26th January, and again 1st and 2nd February 2025.

Separately, it naturally takes some time for demand to increase to fill additional supply, but the 28.8% increase in 'journeys' between London and Newcastle is not a particularly insightful statistic.

To make an objective assessment, the increase in available seats over the same period, and the increase in operating costs would need to be considered.

It could also be affected by a) split-ticketing and b) the removal of some workarounds to the new pricing policy on the route.

As it stands, it's only one statistic, provided without context and in isolation - so without additional transparency, detail and comparative data for other principal flows, including London to Leeds, London to York and London to Edinburgh, as well as subsidiary ones such as those to and from Peterborough, Grantham, Newark, Doncaster, Northallerton, Durham and Berwick-upon-Tweed, it's arguably fairly meaningless.

 

[Bald Rick]

Then there's reliability. Owing to the decision to move the southbound departures 5 minutes earlier, the xx40 departure frequently misses its path at Doncaster owing to catching up the xx20 NT stopper.

But that is timetabled. If the xx40 is missing it’s path, then the xx20 stopper must be late. So that needs sorting.

 

[driverd]

But that is timetabled. If the xx40 is missing it’s path, then the xx20 stopper must be late. So that needs sorting.

It often loses a little bit of time en-route. The point is that 2 or 3 minutes, say, where theres anti-social behaviour or a wheelchair user, never used to matter because the xx.45 departure from Leeds had enough resilience.

The xx.40 departure finds the train at headway and does not have the same baked in resilience.

Further, short of adding more time to the northern service and moving it (at most) 2 minutes earlier (if a path out of Leeds is available), how do you propose improving the situation? Its not as though there's buckets of capacity at either end of the route. My best read on the situation is the class 333s on the route struggle to keep their SRTs - though I'm just an outsider observing, this isn't insider knowledge by any means.