Avanti (West Coast Intercity) after being brought back into public ownership

Does Cross Country not operate Glasgow-Birmingham?

lrbvoyager said:

Does Cross Country not operate Glasgow-Birmingham?

Click to expand...

Just two trains per day, at 0648 and 0748 from Glasgow Central, and arriving back there at 2122 and 2215. The once two-hourly service is long gone.

lrbvoyager said:

Does Cross Country not operate Glasgow-Birmingham?

Click to expand...

Twice a day at 0648 and 0748. The first arrives in Birmingham an hour after the 0800 service via Preston.

That’s not great! Does anyone know why the XC services were cut on the WCML north? Didn’t they used to go via Carlisle rather than Newcastle?

lrbvoyager said:

That’s not great! Does anyone know why the XC services were cut on the WCML north? Didn’t they used to go via Carlisle rather than Newcastle?

Click to expand...

They were split at Birmingham, which meant that they could be operated solely by tilting 221s. Then later linked to the Euston to Wolverhampton service, which meant that capacity could be increased by using Pendolinos rather than Voyagers.

Ah okay, so there’s no chance any of those type of services will return?

lrbvoyager said:

Ah okay, so there’s no chance any of those type of services will return?

Click to expand...

Well there are a limited number of places an electric train can go south of Birmingham, and no realistic prospect of new rolling stock with the capacity of a Pendolino that can operate from the northern WCML onto unelectrictrified routes, particularly with nowhere else needing the released Pendolinos. No one would want Voyagers back on the northern WCML now.

lrbvoyager said:

Does anyone ever see Euston-Glasgow being increased to half hourly like Kings X-Edinburgh is?

Click to expand...

No.

Falcon1200 said:

From personal experience the Manchester Airport/Glasgow service is busy and cannot be abandoned.

Click to expand...

The TPE service is absolutely busy and needs longer trains, not abandonment.

Falcon1200 said:

Why this obsession with abandoning the service linking two of Britain's largest cities, Glasgow and Birmingham, not to mention other places in between, with multiple connectional opportunities? Blackpool passengers can change at Preston!

Click to expand...

Places in between are served by other trains. Blackpool, once again, is a terminus of convenience - moving the Glasgow trains to there is analogous to just terminating them at Preston, they are run to Blackpool because Preston has limited platform capacity all of which is needed if there is disruption, plus I believe Blackpool has servicing facilities. Any of these "via Birmingham" trains being run to Blackpool has nothing whatosever to do with serving Blackpool - it is pure operating convenience. The Glasgow via Birmingham is one of the quieter services Avanti operate north of Preston (the fast Glasgow and the Edinburgh are much busier).

If you've got a few tens of million quid to extend the Res platforms at Preston to 265m and bring them back into use so they could simply spin there I'm sure Avanti would be more than happy to take it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jun 2026 ==

Falcon1200 said:

But still provides a vital link between two huge cities! We have already lost, pretty much, the Cross Country service, and even the Avanti route is only two-hourly. Forcing passengers to change at Preston with, in one direction at least, a long connectional wait, would be unacceptable.

Click to expand...

You cannot have direct trains from everywhere to everywhere, and this route is one of Avanti's lowest demand routes, hence why it's been lopped before.

Before you say "but Blackpool doesn't need..." - again I'm not claiming it does, it is a terminus of convenience, consider it a set of remote bay platforms at Preston. If it would please you the train could run ECS there rather than in service but it would still go there as Preston lacks platform capacity, it only has the two "terminal" platforms for long trains (5/6) and they are soon occupied if there's a cancellation or other disruption.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jun 2026 ==

lrbvoyager said:

Ah okay, so there’s no chance any of those type of services will return?

Click to expand...

It would be regrettable if they did; the via Birmingham service as it is was an absolute masterstroke of basically magic-ing capacity out of thin air as well as improving connectivity (though slightly less so now it doesn't serve Watford/MKC/Rugby). The only real losers were those travelling between Wolves and Birmingham who saw one of their fast options removed, but there are loads of trains for that journey so it really isn't a big loss apart from those who just like out of principle using "the big train" for a short urban commuter journey.

In no way would reinstating that, undoubtedly with a 4 or 5 car Voyager, be in any way better than the 9 or 11 car Pendolinos that now work it.

We know it’s going to be branded “Great British Railways | West Coast”

But given there are also going to be

“Great British Railways | Southern”

and

“Great British Railways | Great Western”

It would have been nice to have:

“Great British Railways | London Midland”

Or

“Great British Railways | London Midland & Scottish”

lrbvoyager said:

So the overall opinion is that it will get worse than it already is?

Click to expand...

[Laughs, or gives a long, blank, hard stare, in John Major]

I really think the TPE services from Manchester/Liverpool need longer trains with better facilities. Standard class is almost always nearly full and at peak times so is first class! They could do with 8 coach trains which have better seats and ride quality and maybe even a shop!?

lrbvoyager said:

I really think the TPE services from Manchester/Liverpool need longer trains with better facilities. Standard class is almost always nearly full and at peak times so is first class! They could do with 8 coach trains which have better seats and ride quality and maybe even a shop!?

Click to expand...

I did think the Avanti 7 car 80x would be perfect for these routes in terms of capacity and comfort. If Avanti do permanently reduce services, perhaps they could take over these services using those units.

Bletchleyite said:

I did think the Avanti 7 car 80x would be perfect for these routes in terms of capacity and comfort. If Avanti do permanently reduce services, perhaps they could take over these services using those units.

Click to expand...

I would think when eveything becomes GBR the TPE services will be transferred to avanti or whatever it will be called. However there aren’t enough 807s to cover all the TPE diagrams, there aren’t even enough 397s! They have to have 2 802s working the WCML daily aswell.

lrbvoyager said:

I would think when eveything becomes GBR the TPE services will be transferred to avanti or whatever it will be called. However there aren’t enough 807s to cover all the TPE diagrams, there aren’t even enough 397s! They have to have 2 802s working the WCML daily aswell.

Click to expand...

How many diagrams are there on the Manchester-Scotland services? It looks like roughly a 3.5 hour journey time, so if we're generous and call it a 4 hour run each way including layover so 8 hours for a full circult including layovers, that would suggest 8 diagrams to get to hourly, and there are ten 807s?

Your forgetting Manchester airport to Edinburgh and Liverpool lime street to Glasgow Central. There are currently 12 397s. It wouldn’t be possible for the 807s to cover the TPE and AWC services at the same time.

Why are people now suggesting Avanti should kill off services? All that will do is encourage more people to drive or fly, which is exactly the opposite of what should be happening.

London Trains said:

Why are people now suggesting Avanti should kill off services? All that will do is encourage more people to drive or fly, which is exactly the opposite of what should be happening.

Click to expand...

I think (hope) this is mostly people thinking about what's likelier to happen with a government looking to cut subsidies more than what should happen.

Bletchleyite said:

You cannot have direct trains from everywhere to everywhere,

Click to expand...

Indeed you cannot, but Scotland's biggest city and England's second city surely deserve a direct link?

Falcon1200 said:

Indeed you cannot, but Scotland's biggest city and England's second city surely deserve a direct link?

Click to expand...

Manchester Airport, Piccadilly and Oxford Road to Glasgow (Central and Queen Street combined; I'd assume most of that from those stations rather than Victoria is via Preston*) comes to 115,000 passengers per year against 110,000 to Edinburgh.

At least until HS2, the TPE and via Birmingham services are also Glasgow's only direct rail services to an airport, though, without knowing about direct flights, I can't see many Glaswegians flying from Birmingham for the convenience.

*from Victoria, it's 35,000 to Edinburgh, 12,000 to Central and 8,000 to Queen Street – if the splits between the termini are accurate.

So more people travel To Edinburgh from Manchester airport/Piccadilly/Oxford Road than to Glasgow

Bletchleyite said:

The Glasgow via Birmingham is the one to cut if you're going to, as these passengers can change at Preston. The Edinburgh as you say is unlikely to be cut.

Click to expand...

lrbvoyager said:

Or Changing the Glasgow via Birmingham to an Edinburgh service. Does anyone know why Avanti can’t operate Edinburgh services via the Trent valley to speed up journey times?

Click to expand...

Ideally XC would cover Birmingham - Edinburgh (via Derby) hourly, and then enable Euston - Birmingham - Glasgow via WCML, which sees 2tph to Glasgow on Pendos. But Edinburgh sees a lot of demand from all over.

I would then do Manchester Airport - Edinburgh hourly. And increase Liverpool - Glasgow to hourly if it was possible. I recall, once upon a time, when Liverpool-Glasgow was launched, that a future splitting at Preston plan might take place. Liv/Manc to Gla/Edi hourly.

If not then I think an hourly Liverpool-Barrow and Man Air - Windermere as supporting for the WCML core stretch would add frequencies and maybe enable the fasts to be sped up.

Writ large - I could see Birmingham and Manchester going to 2tph (Watford / MKC alternating, both call Rugby?) - Manc the routes and calls are obvious - and Liverpool going to 1tph which covers Parkway.

So you’re saying it should be 1tph from Liverpool to Edinburgh via Preston and 1tph from Manchester to Glasgow via Preston? What about Liverpool to Glasgow and Manchester to Edinburgh?

lrbvoyager said:

So more people travel To Edinburgh from Manchester airport/Piccadilly/Oxford Road than to Glasgow

Click to expand...

Where did you get that from, unless assuming most people counted as travelling from Victoria are going from Piccadilly / Oxford Road?

cle said:

Ideally XC would cover Birmingham - Edinburgh (via Derby) hourly, and then enable Euston - Birmingham - Glasgow via WCML, which sees 2tph to Glasgow on Pendos. But Edinburgh sees a lot of demand from all over.

Click to expand...

Going from Birmingham to Edinburgh via the ECML is 55 minutes slower than the equivalent service via the WCML. On the hours it doesn't runIt is still 35 minutes quicker to do Birmigham - Preston/Carlisle on the Glasgow service and then switch to TPE so all you are doing is making lots of passengers change trains.
Don't forget that it is the only direct train to major cities and stations such as Coventry, Birmingham International, Sandwell and Dudley, Wolverhampton, Stafford and biggest of all, Crewe. Removing the connection at Crewe seems completely pointless and detrimental to be honest

A S Leib said:

Where did you get that from, unless assuming most people counted as travelling from Victoria are going from Piccadilly / Oxford Road?

Click to expand...

I’d miss read the Glasgow stats for Edinburgh’s, whoops!

lrbvoyager said:

So you’re saying it should be 1tph from Liverpool to Edinburgh via Preston and 1tph from Manchester to Glasgow via Preston? What about Liverpool to Glasgow and Manchester to Edinburgh?

Click to expand...

No I said:
London-Glasgow
London - Brum - Glasgow
Manchester Air - Edinburgh
Liverpool - Glasgow - all hourly.

But if you combined Manchester and Liverpool at Preston, and split them - you could have hourly from both to both. If that was a huge problem.

Virginfan123 said:

Going from Birmingham to Edinburgh via the ECML is 55 minutes slower than the equivalent service via the WCML. On the hours it doesn't runIt is still 35 minutes quicker to do Birmigham - Preston/Carlisle on the Glasgow service and then switch to TPE so all you are doing is making lots of passengers change trains.
Don't forget that it is the only direct train to major cities and stations such as Coventry, Birmingham International, Sandwell and Dudley, Wolverhampton, Stafford and biggest of all, Crewe. Removing the connection at Crewe seems completely pointless and detrimental to be honest

Click to expand...

This really should be served by stopping pattern. The other stations are busy becuase of their demand to Birmingham and to London. They don't matter in the context of needing direct Scotland service, except maybe Crewe - which would have the Brum Glasgow. Change at Preston for Edinburgh!

cle said:

No I said:
London-Glasgow
London - Brum - Glasgow
Manchester Air - Edinburgh
Liverpool - Glasgow - all hourly.

But if you combined Manchester and Liverpool at Preston, and split them - you could have hourly from both to both. If that was a huge problem.


This really should be served by stopping pattern. The other stations are busy becuase of their demand to Birmingham and to London. They don't matter in the context of needing direct Scotland service, except maybe Crewe - which would have the Brum Glasgow. Change at Preston for Edinburgh!

Click to expand...

So would London-Birmingham-Edinburgh be 2 hourly. Would make sense if the the TPE services were hourly from Glasgow and Edinburgh and split at Preston, 5 coaches for Manchester, 5 for Liverpool.

Not sure there is much wrong with the current Avanti timetable tbh, why are people so keen to change it?

One thing I would consider is changing the Manchester services to a half-hourly fast (first stop Stoke) + 1ph semi-fast via Crewe. This would be similar to the changes made to the 3ph Birmingham a couple of years ago.

This would enable a slight reduction in headline journey times, a better timetable from Stoke to Manchester (eg, enabling half-hourly stoppers) and a generally tidier setup, as most of the network runs to a half-hourly pattern rather than every 20 mins.

cle said:

This really should be served by stopping pattern. The other stations are busy becuase of their demand to Birmingham and to London. They don't matter in the context of needing direct Scotland service, except maybe Crewe - which would have the Brum Glasgow. Change at Preston for Edinburgh!

Click to expand...

Edinburgh is more important and vital in the wider sense of the UK for a direct Birmingham Service, considering that it is far better to connect northwards towards Dundee and Aberdeen. It is perfectly fine as it is now, rotating every two hours. Glasgow does not require 2 11 car pendolinos + a 397 at all hours. Considering this, spliting the service to every 2 hours works well now and is not big enough of a problem to be changed without disgruntling many existing customers