3 New services for Dunbar

[DaveNewcastle]

This hasn't received much publicity (it was a colleague who lives in Dunbar who told me).

ScotRail services had not gone as far east as Dunbar until now, the station being served only by EC and XC with the latest departure from Edinburgh being a ridiculously early 9pm on weekdays and 7pm on Saturdays.

As of 26th May, there's also new weekday First ScotRail services to Dunbar at 10am, 2.21pm and 10.08pm (Monday to Thursday, or 11.17pm on Fridays); Dunbar to Edinburgh at 10.57am and 3.04pm. (seems odd to run 3 east-bound and 2 west-bound. Surely not?).

That still leaves no hope for a Saturday night out in Edinburgh though, when the last departure from the Capital is still 7pm.

 

[CarterUSM]

This hasn't receive much publicity (it was a colleague who lives in Dunbar who told me).

ScotRail services had not gone as far east as Dunbar until now, the station being served only by EC and XC with the latest departure from Edinburgh being a ridiculously early 9pm on weekdays and 7pm on Saturdays.

As of 26th May, there's also new weekday First ScotRail services to Dunbar at 10am, 2.21pm and 10.08pm (Monday to Thursday, or 11.17pm on Fridays); Dunbar to Edinburgh at 10.57am and 3.04pm. (seems odd to run 3 east-bound and 2 west-bound?).

That still leaves no hope for a Saturday night out in Edinburgh though, when the last departure from the Capital is still 7pm.

I think we discussed this a few weeks ago, but since then, some people of Dunbar have complained this new service is only good for those wanting to go shopping. Anyone have any info on how busy these services are?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Sorry, you're right,
there was a thread about this here.

I see now that its a trial, and FSR will assess useage of the service in November. I can guess that these findings will inform the revisions to all Central Belt timetables when Ardrie-Bathgate begins running.

 

[CarterUSM]

Sorry, you're right,
there was a thread about this here.

I see now that its a trial, and FSR will assess useage of the service in November. I can guess that these findings will inform the revisions to all Central Belt timetables when Ardrie-Bathgate begins running.

I was unaware it was a trial, I think they could've made a wee peak service in the morning and at night if it were possible all the same.

 

[tbtc]

I was unaware it was a trial, I think they could've made a wee peak service in the morning and at night if it were possible all the same.

I suppose that there's the argument that if there are spare paths and spare units, then ScotRail should concentrate these on North Berwick (which has no other TOCs), instead of Dunbar (which is already served by East Coast/ Cross Country)?

 

[rail-britain]

As of 26th May, there's also new weekday First ScotRail services to Dunbar at 10am, 2.21pm and 10.08pm (Monday to Thursday, or 11.17pm on Fridays); Dunbar to Edinburgh at 10.57am and 3.04pm. (seems odd to run 3 east-bound and 2 west-bound. Surely not?)

The complaint from locals was the lack of support from ScotRail, so this is a token gesture to fill the gaps
In effect the extra Dunbar - Edinburgh services, give an hourly service between 06:00 and 18:00 and a fairly regular (but not hourly) service between Edinburgh and Dunbar, extending the service beyond 21:00

However once the new ECML timetable is introduced there is an opportunity to increase this service frequency

One criticism that has arisen is the services do not call at many of the intermediate stations

 

[bluesfromagun]

Hi
In reference to the previous points, I've worked three Dunbar services since they came in, and the most I've had is 12 passengers!
We were told when we routelearned Drem to Dunbar that we'd probably be routelearning Berwick next year, and Newcastle 2012/2013. ScotRail have applied for three (I think) paths a day from Edb - Ncl already, in my opinion it will be semi fast services operated by 170's (380's would be useless, no first class, high density seating, and no room for a catering trolley, not to mention being DOO units), and I've been led to believe in the long-term it will allow East Coast to start and terminate more services at Newcastle which has been their goal for some time I think.

 

[rail-britain]

I've been led to believe in the long-term it will allow East Coast to start and terminate more services at Newcastle which has been their goal for some time I think

More than likely that of the DfT, and now it is all one and the same it is easier to implement
In InterCity days the electrification was proposed as only going as far as Electrification...
Next the DfT will want West Coast services to start and terminate at Carlisle!

 

[Failed Unit]

Hi
In reference to the previous points, I've worked three Dunbar services since they came in, and the most I've had is 12 passengers!
We were told when we routelearned Drem to Dunbar that we'd probably be routelearning Berwick next year, and Newcastle 2012/2013. ScotRail have applied for three (I think) paths a day from Edb - Ncl already, in my opinion it will be semi fast services operated by 170's (380's would be useless, no first class, high density seating, and no room for a catering trolley, not to mention being DOO units), and I've been led to believe in the long-term it will allow East Coast to start and terminate more services at Newcastle which has been their goal for some time I think.

I don't get this for many reasons.

1. 170's more DMU's under the wires! But Scotrail are struggling at many times of the year to get enough 170's out to cover the diagrams they already have already. If 170 traction is proposed it should be rejected outright as this is not good use of a DMU, they could put 1st class on a 380 if they service is needed, I mean look at 170450 - 455! I know no-one knows about proposed traction by DMU is just wrong.

2. You are talking about 2 years after Eureka has bedded down so people may be used to the service patterns. If services are terminated at Newcastle it will make matters even worse for Doncaster and Peterborough then they are anyway. East Coast services in the day are well loaded between Newcastle and Edinburgh. I can see however why they would want to remove the 1730 service BUT removing the stops altogether, having a change of train or adding stops into the 1800 would be very unpopular. This was suggested recently and rejected. A connecting train is only any good when the connection are solid.

3. Why not just amend the XC stopping pattern. On the hours there is no East Coast service at x00 then run the XC service at that time, stop it at Dunbar, Berwick-upon-Tweed, Alnmouth & Morpeth. I would still be at Newcastle in time for its path south and no extra stock would be needed.

Looking further into the future, if Scotrail did operate to Newcastle it would be good if it ran to Glasgow once the E&G is electrified.

I think Dunbar has got a reasonable service for people wanting to travel to work provided by East Coast and XC! I know thier are gaps off-peak and the evening definately needs sorting however!

 

[tbtc]

Cutting the Glasgow ECML services back to Edinburgh will save one 225 rake. Cutting the Edinburgh service down to one an hour (instead of the halfhourly service at some times of the day) would save an additional one or two. I can see "some" logic" in using shorter trains like Voyagers on the Glasgow - Edinburgh stretch, and maybe a Voyager at a push could replace some 225s north of Newcastle...

...BUT, what are the "saved" 225s going to be used on? Given the way that ECML (and GNER/ NXEC before them) diagram their units, there's not a lot of HSTs running permenantly under the wires (since the diagram will require diesel haulage for Inverness/ Aberdeen/ Hull/ Skipton/ Harrogate at some stage in the day).

Since London - Leeds and London - Newcastle are both at an optimum frequency (half hourly), why the need to "save" more 225s? I can see them having a long term use elsewhere (like London - Norwich, or the MML if it gets wired), but no real need in the short term.

The only real purpose I can find is that this would give enough for the hourly London - Newark (with bi-hourly extension to York). Or am I missing something?

 

[sonic2009]

Scotrail should maybe refurb a few 320/321?? Or could grab hold of some redudant 319?? A 170 i think will be a bad idea..

 

[Failed Unit]

The only real purpose I can find is that this would give enough for the hourly London - Newark (with bi-hourly extension to York). Or am I missing something?

Lets say that the save sets and changes to diagrams could result in the London - Lincoln service getting introduced, I can't see how this would generate more money than running the trains between Newcastle and Edinburgh. Surely from ORCAT's alone it is better to run these?

As I said earlier I can see the logic about removing the 1730 north of Newcastle. If you want to remove trains from the ECML get rid of the XC ones, their loading are a lot lower than the East Coast ones.

 

[sprinterguy]

Lets say that the save sets and changes to diagrams could result in the London - Lincoln service getting introduced, I can't see how this would generate more money than running the trains between Newcastle and Edinburgh. Surely from ORCAT's alone it is better to run these?

Using freed-up 225s for the London-Newark/York services will save East Coast money as it will not be paying the leasing and operating costs for the 5 180s originally designated for the service, when the existing EC fleet can be stretched to cover the whole Eureka service.

I don't like the way that the ECML is being broken down into sections, it will ruin the connectivity of anglo-scottish rail on the east coast, and force passengers either onto the West Coast or to fly for long distance journeys. Replacing a 9 carriage 225 train, with extensive first class accomodation and buffet facilities, with a 3 carriage Turbostar running on diesel power under the wires is a no brainer on all counts, be it passenger comfort, capacity or operations cost.

As I said earlier I can see the logic about removing the 1730 north of Newcastle. If you want to remove trains from the ECML get rid of the XC ones, their loading are a lot lower than the East Coast ones.

That makes a whole load of sense, truly. From what I've seen I agree the XC loadings are lower, plus the Voyagers offer much lower capacity than the 225s. By turning back the XC services at Newcastle or perhaps even York in some instances it would free up Voyagers for doubling up trains elsewhere on the XC network where such capacity enhancements are dsperately needed. If you are travelling to the South West from Edinburgh it is probably quicker or at least a comparable journey time to travel across to Glasgow and take the West Coast to Birmingham.
Cutting back East Coast services on the northern section of the ECML to release less than a handful of 225s whilst driving down the capacity and comfort levels seems pointless.

 

[Failed Unit]

Using freed-up 225s for the London-Newark/York services will save East Coast money as it will not be paying the leasing and operating costs for the 5 180s originally designated for the service, when the existing EC fleet can be stretched to cover the whole Eureka service.

Although it is not certain their is any fact in this, it will come 2 years after Eureka anyway. London - York will be done in Eureka by existing trains, it is only Lincoln that is gone. But I can't see how Lincoln - London could be more profitable then Edinburgh - Newcastle (-London). If train between Newcastle & Edinburgh were cut back they would be handing a share of ORCAT's money direct to XC. If they doubled the service to Newcastle they are going to need to grow the market to make up this lost of revenue.

 

[Scotrail84]

Scotrail should maybe refurb a few 320/321?? Or could grab hold of some redudant 319?? A 170 i think will be a bad idea..

You are joking right regarding these units, they are dire! Atleast 170s could be put round via Carlisle if the ECML went bellly up and they can do 100mph
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Hi
In reference to the previous points, I've worked three Dunbar services since they came in, and the most I've had is 12 passengers!
We were told when we routelearned Drem to Dunbar that we'd probably be routelearning Berwick next year, and Newcastle 2012/2013. ScotRail have applied for three (I think) paths a day from Edb - Ncl already, in my opinion it will be semi fast services operated by 170's (380's would be useless, no first class, high density seating, and no room for a catering trolley, not to mention being DOO units), and I've been led to believe in the long-term it will allow East Coast to start and terminate more services at Newcastle which has been their goal for some time I think.

They could go DOO with 170s next week if they wanted. Look at the layout of the cab. Its designed to be driver only.

 

[Failed Unit]

[/B]


You are joking right regarding these units, they are dire! Atleast 170s could be put round via Carlisle if the ECML went bellly up and they can do 100mph
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---




They could go DOO with 170s next week if they wanted. Look at the layout of the cab. Its designed to be driver only.

But sending them around Carlisle would never happen while the hst is still around. They would have slack in the fleet on weekends anyway. Dmu under the wires just in case is just wrong! The 321s are very good units and could have same seats as the 170s if needed.
I guess the cab on a 170 is designed for doo because it is the sakes as on a 357 which is doo.

 

[gingerheid]

Oh dear.

Train journeys from East Anglia to Ayrshire are going to get even more impossible

Cambridge > Ely > Peterborough > Doncaster > Newcastle > Edinburgh > Glasgow > Destination?

or Camridge > Stansted > Prestwick Airport / Glasgow Airport> Destination?

 

[CarterUSM]

What is the supposed reasoning behind withdrawing the majority of services from Glasgow?

 

[tbtc]

What is the supposed reasoning behind withdrawing the majority of services from Glasgow?

I presume because its a waste of a nine coach 225. Voyagers would be more suited to the loads between Glasgow and Edinburgh on the East Coast service.

AFAIK there would be the same number of trains each day, but only one of them would be an East Coast service, with the remainder provided by Cross Country

 

[CarterUSM]

I presume because its a waste of a nine coach 225. Voyagers would be more suited to the loads between Glasgow and Edinburgh on the East Coast service.

AFAIK there would be the same number of trains each day, but only one of them would be an East Coast service, with the remainder provided by Cross Country

I don't know what the loadings are, but it is a real shame withdrawing a through train from a major terminal station regardless.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I don't know what the loadings are, but it is a real shame withdrawing a through train from a major terminal station regardless.

I couldn't agree more.
But its worse than "a shame".
The loadings on most Glasgow NE England services may be relatively light for the full-length 9 car EC trains, but they are, in absolute terms, very valuable links between many key hubs between and including Glasgow and London.

I'd have no issue with, say, removing one London - Glasgow per day and replacing it with a second London - Inverness service, but its a serious inability in understanding the bigger picture of the network as an integrated market, caused by the fragmentation into franchises (which make some sort of sense in their own right, but not to the complex mix of daily travel patterns and demands).