As per Avanti, how could TPE's service be reduced so it is operable reliably?

[Bletchleyite]

TPE's timetable is already significantly reduced from what it was pre covid. An emergency timetable for TPE would basically be bin the entire lot.

I just don't think that is true.

Dec has the following (both ways) I believe:
1tph Liverpool-Newcastle
1tph Liverpool-Hull
1tph Manchester Airport-Saltburn
0.5tph Scarborough-York
0.5tph Scarborough-Man Picc
1tph Man Picc-Hudds local
1tph Liv-Cleethorpes
Irregular Newcastle-Edinburgh
1tph Man Airport-Glasgow/Edinburgh
Irregular Liverpool-Scotland

I think that's all of it.

There's plenty of scope to cut from that if you look at what Avanti has done to get (vaguely) reliable.

For instance, just operate:
1tph Liverpool<->Newcastle (6.185) (5.802)
1tph Manchester Picc<->Hull (5.802) (6.185)
1tph Hudds local (really a Northern service - 3.185)
1tph York<->Redcar (3.185)
0.5tph Sheffield<->Cleethorpes (3.185)
Preston<->Edinburgh 0.5tph (10.397 or 10.802 if possible - should fit the platforms! Northern operate 2tph connections from Manchester)

Newcastle<->Edinburgh only as needed to meet Scottish Government contract and to interchange stock

Nothing to Scarborough (it's got an hourly Northern service and demand isn't as high in winter) - minibus shuttle for Malton to wherever makes sense
Nothing to Manchester Airport (waste of a diagram in these circumstances, there are plenty of connections)
Nothing to Glasgow, people can change onto Avanti or go across on ScotRail from Edinburgh

If even that isn't workable, drop Hull to a shuttle from Leeds.
If you *still* need more lopping, Newcastle cut back to Manchester Piccadilly with no service to Manchester Vic or Liverpool.
If you need yet more, bin all WCML service other than that required to get stock to Scotland for maintenance.

All diagrams to be fully self contained, i.e. no unit or crew to operate on more than one route on any given day, or if union agreements ban this then interworking to be absolutely minimised.

 

[Kite159]

Nothing to Scarborough (it's got an hourly Northern service and demand isn't as high in winter)

Poor Malton, not deemed important enough to warrant a service

I would swap over so Liverpool - Newcastle is 802 & Manchester - Hull is 185s.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Poor Malton, not deemed important enough to warrant a service

Didn't realise Northern went a different way. But a minibus shuttle could be provided so it doesn't get nothing.

I would swap over so Liverpool - Newcastle is 802 & Manchester - Hull is 185s.

I assumed the former would be busier hence the longer trains, but I'm open to that or even using 5.802 on all of it. To be fair you probably need the 125mph units on the ECML.

Perhaps consider declassifying 1st for added capacity.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Dec 2022 ==

Just realised I missed Cleethorpes which would have no service, so added it in (0.5tph shuttle from Sheffield).

 

[DanNCL]

My suggestion would be this:
1tph York - Scarborough (Mk5)
1tph Redcar - Manchester Airport (185 and 802)
1tph Hull - Piccadilly (185)
1tph stoppers (185)
1tph Sheffield - Liverpool (185 and Mk5)
1tph Doncaster - Cleethorpes (185)
Limited ECML service where required for stock movements.
0.5tph WCML, opposite hours to Avanti Birmingham service (397 and 802)

Chester-le-Street and Reston can be served by asking XC to make calls in place of TPE. LNER already serve all the other ECML stations that would be skipped.

Sheffield - Doncaster has an adequate service from Northern, as well as a couple of XC services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Manchester Airport is just a waste of diagrams. That should go before anything else does. Yes, it's well used, but so is the rest of it, and there are alternatives with enough capacity. Liverpool<->Manchester is tight on capacity so I'd keep one Liverpool extension in preference to operating to the Airport.

I think yours would be nearly twice as many diagrams as mine. It all depends how far they need to cut to become reliable. I think, like Avanti, the answer is "further than they think".

 

[DanNCL]

Manchester Airport is just a waste of diagrams. That should go before anything else does. Yes, it's well used, but so is the rest of it, and there are alternatives.

I think yours would be nearly twice as many diagrams as mine. It all depends how far they need to cut to become reliable. I think, like Avanti, the answer is "further than they think".

Airport has a crew base so some level of service has to be maintained there. There also needs to be some level of service via the Ordsall Chord for it to satisfy the criteria of being an ‘open’ railway

I’ve updated my list as I’d realised I’d forgotten Liverpool and the WCML

 

[Bletchleyite]

Airport has a crew base so some level of service has to be maintained there.

No, it doesn't. They can travel to/from Picc on Northern services or in taxis.

There also needs to be some level of service via the Ordsall Chord for it to satisfy the criteria of being an ‘open’ railway

1 train per week in one direction will do.

I’ve updated my list as I’d realised I’d forgotten Liverpool and the WCML

Fair enough.

 

[DanNCL]

No, it doesn't. They can travel to/from Picc on Northern services or in taxis.

Only if the DFT will sign off the expenditure, and in any case something would still have to run for route retention.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Only if the DFT will sign off the expenditure

Cheaper than a train.

and in any case something would still have to run for route retention.

1 train per week.

 

[Greybeard33]

Dec has the following (both ways) I believe:
1tph Liverpool-Newcastle
1tph Liverpool-Hull
1tph Manchester Airport-Saltburn
0.5tph Scarborough-York
0.5tph Scarborough-Man Picc
1tph Man Picc-Hudds local
1tph Liv-Cleethorpes
Irregular Newcastle-Edinburgh
1tph Man Airport-Glasgow/Edinburgh
Irregular Liverpool-Scotland

I think that's all of it.

Regarding the published December timetable, you have omitted 0.5tph Newcastle-Man Picc (alternating with Scarborough) and 1tph Leeds-Hudds local.

 

[Bantamzen]

I just don't think that is true.

Dec has the following (both ways) I believe:
1tph Liverpool-Newcastle
1tph Liverpool-Hull
1tph Manchester Airport-Saltburn
0.5tph Scarborough-York
0.5tph Scarborough-Man Picc
1tph Man Picc-Hudds local
1tph Liv-Cleethorpes
Irregular Newcastle-Edinburgh
1tph Man Airport-Glasgow/Edinburgh
Irregular Liverpool-Scotland

I think that's all of it.

There's plenty of scope to cut from that if you look at what Avanti has done to get (vaguely) reliable.

For instance, just operate:
1tph Liverpool<->Newcastle (6.185) (5.802)
1tph Manchester Picc<->Hull (5.802) (6.185)
1tph Hudds local (really a Northern service - 3.185)
1tph York<->Redcar (3.185)
0.5tph Sheffield<->Cleethorpes (3.185)
Preston<->Edinburgh 0.5tph (10.397 or 10.802 if possible - should fit the platforms! Northern operate 2tph connections from Manchester)

Newcastle<->Edinburgh only as needed to meet Scottish Government contract and to interchange stock

Nothing to Scarborough (it's got an hourly Northern service and demand isn't as high in winter) - minibus shuttle for Malton to wherever makes sense
Nothing to Manchester Airport (waste of a diagram in these circumstances, there are plenty of connections)
Nothing to Glasgow, people can change onto Avanti or go across on ScotRail from Edinburgh

If even that isn't workable, drop Hull to a shuttle from Leeds.
If you *still* need more lopping, Newcastle cut back to Manchester Piccadilly with no service to Manchester Vic or Liverpool.
If you need yet more, bin all WCML service other than that required to get stock to Scotland for maintenance.

All diagrams to be fully self contained, i.e. no unit or crew to operate on more than one route on any given day, or if union agreements ban this then interworking to be absolutely minimised.

This all looks very suspiciously like a sneaky way of suddenly having loads of spare capacity for Manc-Bahn. Make cross-Manchester regional (that ought really to be inter city) even more problematic by dumping even more punters into Manchester's already crowded stations, and hope that the experience will make them find another way to complete their journeys. Then Manchester's railways will be for the exclusive use of Mancunhians without all those pesky "not locals" hanging about the place....


Or am I being too cynical here....??

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I just don't think that is true.

Dec has the following (both ways) I believe:
1tph Liverpool-Newcastle
1tph Liverpool-Hull
1tph Manchester Airport-Saltburn
0.5tph Scarborough-York
0.5tph Scarborough-Man Picc
1tph Man Picc-Hudds local
1tph Liv-Cleethorpes
Irregular Newcastle-Edinburgh
1tph Man Airport-Glasgow/Edinburgh
Irregular Liverpool-Scotland

I think that's all of it.

There's plenty of scope to cut from that if you look at what Avanti has done to get (vaguely) reliable.

For instance, just operate:
1tph Liverpool<->Newcastle (6.185) (5.802)
1tph Manchester Picc<->Hull (5.802) (6.185)
1tph Hudds local (really a Northern service - 3.185)
1tph York<->Redcar (3.185)
0.5tph Sheffield<->Cleethorpes (3.185)
Preston<->Edinburgh 0.5tph (10.397 or 10.802 if possible - should fit the platforms! Northern operate 2tph connections from Manchester)

Newcastle<->Edinburgh only as needed to meet Scottish Government contract and to interchange stock

Nothing to Scarborough (it's got an hourly Northern service and demand isn't as high in winter) - minibus shuttle for Malton to wherever makes sense
Nothing to Manchester Airport (waste of a diagram in these circumstances, there are plenty of connections)
Nothing to Glasgow, people can change onto Avanti or go across on ScotRail from Edinburgh

If even that isn't workable, drop Hull to a shuttle from Leeds.
If you *still* need more lopping, Newcastle cut back to Manchester Piccadilly with no service to Manchester Vic or Liverpool.
If you need yet more, bin all WCML service other than that required to get stock to Scotland for maintenance.

All diagrams to be fully self contained, i.e. no unit or crew to operate on more than one route on any given day, or if union agreements ban this then interworking to be absolutely minimised.

You’d need to run something Scarborough to York, it’s an awful long way round via Hull and tickets aren’t even valid that way. You’d also have Scarborough TPE crews with nothing to do there and start to loose route knowledge.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You’d need to run something Scarborough to York, it’s an awful long way round via Hull and tickets aren’t even valid that way. You’d also have Scarborough TPE crews with nothing to do there and start to loose route knowledge.

OK, add a 0.5tph shuttle from York with a single 3-car 185.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

OK, add a 0.5tph shuttle from York with a single 3-car 185.

You’d use 68s and mk5s surely on that? Think how much training has been done on those. Not using them anywhere in your plan would start to see competency dropped.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This all looks very suspiciously like a sneaky way of suddenly having loads of spare capacity for Manc-Bahn. Make cross-Manchester regional (that ought really to be inter city) even more problematic by dumping even more punters into Manchester's already crowded stations, and hope that the experience will make them find another way to complete their journeys. Then Manchester's railways will be for the exclusive use of Mancunhians without all those pesky "not locals" hanging about the place....


Or am I being too cynical here....??

Yes, because like Avanti this is a temporary proposal.

My permanent proposal would be 4tph North TPE and 2tph South TPE with nothing to the Airport and a view to moving to 10-car operation on some services, plus ECML-Scotland to ScotRail and WCML Manchester services in full (no Liverpools). I know you wouldn't like that either though!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Dec 2022 ==

You’d use 68s and mk5s surely on that? Think how much training has been done on those. Not using them anywhere in your plan would start to see competency dropped.

OK, a single 68 and Mk5 set

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Yes, because like Avanti this is a temporary proposal.

My permanent proposal would be 4tph North TPE and 2tph South TPE with nothing to the Airport and a view to moving to 10-car operation on some services, plus ECML-Scotland to ScotRail and WCML services in full. I know you wouldn't like that either though!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Dec 2022 ==



OK, a single 68 and Mk5 set

Emergency timetables can cause problems is all traction and routes aren’t covered as just creates long term problems. This was discovered quite early on in covid reduced timetables nationally.

 

[Watershed]

I just don't think that is true.

Dec has the following (both ways) I believe:
1tph Liverpool-Newcastle
1tph Liverpool-Hull
1tph Manchester Airport-Saltburn
0.5tph Scarborough-York
0.5tph Scarborough-Man Picc
1tph Man Picc-Hudds local
1tph Liv-Cleethorpes
Irregular Newcastle-Edinburgh
1tph Man Airport-Glasgow/Edinburgh
Irregular Liverpool-Scotland

I think that's all of it.

There's plenty of scope to cut from that if you look at what Avanti has done to get (vaguely) reliable.

For instance, just operate:
1tph Liverpool<->Newcastle (6.185) (5.802)
1tph Manchester Picc<->Hull (5.802) (6.185)
1tph Hudds local (really a Northern service - 3.185)
1tph York<->Redcar (3.185)
0.5tph Sheffield<->Cleethorpes (3.185)
Preston<->Edinburgh 0.5tph (10.397 or 10.802 if possible - should fit the platforms! Northern operate 2tph connections from Manchester)

Newcastle<->Edinburgh only as needed to meet Scottish Government contract and to interchange stock

Nothing to Scarborough (it's got an hourly Northern service and demand isn't as high in winter) - minibus shuttle for Malton to wherever makes sense
Nothing to Manchester Airport (waste of a diagram in these circumstances, there are plenty of connections)
Nothing to Glasgow, people can change onto Avanti or go across on ScotRail from Edinburgh

If even that isn't workable, drop Hull to a shuttle from Leeds.
If you *still* need more lopping, Newcastle cut back to Manchester Piccadilly with no service to Manchester Vic or Liverpool.
If you need yet more, bin all WCML service other than that required to get stock to Scotland for maintenance.

All diagrams to be fully self contained, i.e. no unit or crew to operate on more than one route on any given day, or if union agreements ban this then interworking to be absolutely minimised.

All these proposals are well and good - but they would mean many depots losing route and traction knowledge.

Hence why Avanti still run services to Holyhead, Wrexham, Shrewsbury and Blackpool - despite these all having other operators which would provide adequate alternatives.

I would have said any emergency timetable would be more on the following basis:

• 1tph Liverpool-Newcastle
• 1tph Man Picc-Leeds calling all stations, extending to Hull every second hour
• 1tph Man Airport-York, extending to Redcar every second hour, plus 2tpd to Saltburn
• 0.5tph Scarborough-York
• 0.5tph Liverpool-Cleethorpes
• 4tpd Newcastle-Edinburgh (Berwick shuttles binned off)
• 0.5tph Man Airport-Glasgow/Edinburgh (so 0.25tph to each)
• 2tpd Liverpool-Preston

The stock used is almost a secondary concern - you would still need to use 68s on some services if you wanted to keep up that competency. In terms of frequencies, the above would essentially be the bare minimum required just to keep up route knowledge whilst providing any reasonable sort of service.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Emergency timetables can cause problems is all traction and routes aren’t covered as just creates long term problems. This was discovered quite early on in covid reduced timetables nationally.

It is better than operating an unusably poor service.

If you think it's not, please don't ever get a job in customer service.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

It is better than operating an unusably poor service.

If you think it's not, please don't ever get a job in customer service.

I didn’t say you can’t have an emergency timetable. Just you need to make sure the timetable covers all routes and tractions so competency isn’t lost else you end up in a vicious circle you can’t get out of.

The current TPE situation is largely caused by huge amounts of crew being non productive as they are traction training you don’t want to add to that problem else you will never break that cycle. That’s why emergency timetables take quite a lot of planning by the train planning teams.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I didn’t say you can’t have an emergency timetable. Just you need to make sure the timetable covers all routes and tractions so competency isn’t lost else you end up in a vicious circle you can’t get out of.

if you the current situation is largely caused by huge amounts of crew being non productive as they are traction training you don’t want to add to that problem else you will never break that cycle.

Yes, fair point, I'm open to other suggestions such as @Watershed's, though I'll admit I would permanently* prune some of the lesser served locations from TPE, plus I don't believe they should serve Manchester Airport long term either, that should be a Northern Stalybridge to Airport EMU twice an hour once Stalybridge is electrified. Yes, as part of the S-Bahn-Manchester concept @Bantamzen hates so much

* Liverpool for now at least, Scarborough to become a Northern service from York permanently plus Manchester Airport, not least because it is a barrier to 10-car operation which I believe to be essential in the medium to long term. Also the stoppers around Huddersfield should return to Northern in the long term.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

It is better than operating an unusably poor service.

If you think it's not, please don't ever get a job in customer service.

The irony of you saying this, and then originally saying that Scarborough York (45 mins) should temporarily be withdrawn because Northern serve Scarborough.

Scarborough - Hull - York on Northern, starting on the hourly **02 Northern service from Scarborough and changing to the **50 at Hull, takes three hours.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The irony of you saying this, and then originally saying that Scarborough York (45 mins) should temporarily be withdrawn because Northern serve Scarborough.

Scarborough - Hull - York on Northern, starting on the hourly **02 Northern service from Scarborough and changing to the **50 at Hull, takes three hours.

I'll admit I misread that one - I thought the Northern service went the same way as the TPE.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I'll admit I misread that one - I thought the Northern service went the same way as the TPE.

To York? Yes it goes via Bridlington instead, and continues to Hull and usually reverses before continuing to Sheffield.

 

[DanNCL]

I still very much think TPE should axe everything on the ECML apart from the Redcar services and the bare minimum to Newcastle and Edinburgh required for crew retention and access to Craigentinny for the 802s. Recent months have shown that TPE are incapable of even running 0.5tph reliably to Newcastle, and people already ignore TPE services when planning journeys as they know it can’t be relied on.

Chester-le-Street and Reston are the only two stations that would be left unserved - XC could be asked to stop at both of them.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Yes, fair point, I'm open to other suggestions such as @Watershed's, though I'll admit I would permanently* prune some of the lesser served locations from TPE, plus I don't believe they should serve Manchester Airport long term either, that should be a Northern Stalybridge to Airport EMU twice an hour once Stalybridge is electrified. Yes, as part of the S-Bahn-Manchester concept @Bantamzen hates so much

* Liverpool for now at least, Scarborough to become a Northern service from York permanently plus Manchester Airport, not least because it is a barrier to 10-car operation which I believe to be essential in the medium to long term. Also the stoppers around Huddersfield should return to Northern in the long term.

I understand Manchester Airport to be one of TPE’s biggest markets, it’s a very strong flow from Scotland as has a wider range of flights. Whilst that might need to be temporarily considered long term it’s not going to be popular or do anything for the railways revenue

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Chester-le-Street and Reston are the only two stations that would be left unserved - XC could be asked to stop at both of them.

Slowing down the only reliable service on the ECML.

 

[DanNCL]

Slowing down the only reliable service on the ECML.

The Northbound XC usually sits at Newcastle for long enough that adding a Chester-le-Street stop wouldn’t result in a late departure from Newcastle. Is arriving into Edinburgh 2 or 3 minutes late the end of the world? Not really

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Chester-le-Street and Reston are the only two stations that would be left unserved - XC could be asked to stop at both of them.

I understand Chester-le-Street to not have long platforms and voyagers don’t have SDO so this would preclude XC stopping here. The calls would need to go in LNER services as the 80x do have SDO.

 

[DanNCL]

I understand Chester-le-Street to not have long platforms and voyagers don’t have SDO so this would preclude XC stopping here. The calls would need to go in LNER services as the 80x do have SDO.

XC have served Chester-le-Street with voyagers in the past without issue, they did it daily until March 2020. It’s only multiple voyager formations that can’t call.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Dec 2022 ==

Worst case scenario for the voyagers, use local door.

The only stock properly prevented from stopping at Chester-le-Street were 91+Mark 4 sets, and even that was only a case of stopping them there being an unwise idea because of the risk of stranding it in the adjacent neutral section.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

XC have served Chester-le-Street with voyagers in the past without issue, they did it daily until March 2020. It’s only multiple voyager formations that can’t call.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Dec 2022 ==

Worst case scenario for the voyagers, use local door.

The only stock properly prevented from stopping at Chester-le-Street were 91+Mark 4 sets, and even that was only a case of stopping them there being an unwise idea because of the risk of stranding it in the adjacent neutral section.

This would give some issues where there are consecutive long trains. XC do not serve stations using local doors with voyagers. It really would be easier operationally to put these calls into LNER services if they had to go somewhere else.