Chiltern franchise replacement thoughts?

[NickBucks]

Well lots of ideas expressed here . I hope however that someone in the DfT is having a long hard look at the Aylesbury- Amersham- Marylebone issue. There are lots of comments about lack of capacity south of Harrow and at Marylebone. As it stands many acres of farm land to the north of Aylesbury to the MK boundary and to the east of Aylesbury are due to be concreted over and several housing estates created in the next 30 years. Aylesbury already has Garden Town status with new estates to the east of the town already built / under construction. We know from published sources that the East- West rail corridor will be accompanied by ribbon development along the route. Aylesbury and surrounds are commuter towns now. Despite Government/ Bucks CC views that employment will be generated by the Garden Town status I doubt this will be sufficient to absorb all the extra folk who will therefore be commuting even allowing for home working and likely to be going mainly in one direction- to London. The Chiltern service is already at capacity in the peak on the Amersham /LUL line and fellow posters have already highlighted the issues. In the long term sticking plaster solutions will not do and some radical options will have to be considered.

 

[bramling]

Is there actually any need for the innersuburban Chiltern stations at all, with the possible exception of Wembley Stadium which could be served on matchdays / for events only, and Northolt Park which isn't anywhere near anything else? Should they simply close? They are all reasonably near Tube stations which far more people use.

Wembley Stadium has always been rather busy when I've used it. Agreed about the two Sudbury stations though.

 

[bramling]

In my view it should be a franchise breach to have any standing passengers on trains off-peak (i.e. not Monday-Friday 7-10am and 4-7pm).

Where can I vote for this idea? Fantastic. Won't ever happen though!

 

[The Planner]

For instance, all stations Wycombe to Marylebone takes something like 45 minutes. I reckon you'd be able to get 15 minutes off that with electrification, the right EMUs and targetted linespeed improvements.

No chance, the tiny stations are on ½ minute dwells as it is, so unless you can get the bigger stations such as Gerrards X and Beaconsfield down to ½ minute dwells you won't make a dent. Even with faster acceleration you would still only get ½ minutes when departing stations, it won't all add up.

 

[Clip]

Is there actually any need for the innersuburban Chiltern stations at all, with the possible exception of Wembley Stadium which could be served on matchdays / for events only, and Northolt Park which isn't anywhere near anything else? Should they simply close? They are all reasonably near Tube stations which far more people use.

Wembley Stadium has always been rather busy when I've used it. Agreed about the two Sudbury stations though.

Youd have a hard job with Brent & Harrow councils to put anything like that through and as Bramling says Wembley is now quite well used and as for the Sudburys well one is only used in the peaks and the other is hourly(?) so you are not putting much of a dent into the plans people imagine if you took it out

 

[VT 390]

Wembley Stadium has always been rather busy when I've used it. Agreed about the two Sudbury stations though.

But if the service was increased at the smaller stations then people would probably use them more as the Chiltern service is a lot faster than the Underground options in these areas (especially the Piccadilly line).

 

[Bletchleyite]

But if the service was increased at the smaller stations then people would probably use them more as the Chiltern service is a lot faster than the Underground options in these areas (especially the Piccadilly line).

Yes, but serving them is inconvenient and limits what can be done with longer-distance Chiltern services (I'm talking the middle-distance commuter heartland, not Chiltern's quest to be an IC operation).

It's also only faster if you happen to be going to Marylebone, which isn't really near an awful lot other than Madam Tussaud's, even if it is "the gentleman's terminus" and a real pleasure to use.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

But if the service was increased at the smaller stations then people would probably use them more as the Chiltern service is a lot faster than the Underground options in these areas (especially the Piccadilly line).

The revenue to Chiltern would be peanuts - Oyster / Travelcard allocation , compared to the yield from further out. Let alone capacity - on train and route capacity. A long standing "stand off" ......

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

On the current franchise model, the DfT will decide broadly what it wants from Chiltern in the franchise prospectus/consultation/ITT.
Rolling stock replacement (particularly the Turbos) must be high on the list, and the life of Mk3s is finite.
Competing with HS2 as well as the WCML I don't think is going to be a priority, even if it's attractive for a TOC in headline terms.
I'd say the emphasis will be on improving the suburban routes (out to Aylesbury/Banbury/Oxford) more than the long distance ones.
Good integration with EWR would also be attractive.

The DfT has shied away from major infrastructure changes lately, after the electrification and upgrade problems elsewhere.
CP6 development is going to be all about ECML and TPE upgrades, and preparing for HS2.
The Chiltern route is quite modern after all the Evergreen changes and should last another franchise round.
What happens to XC on the route north of Banbury also matters - I would guess they are heading towards bi-modes at the moment.
In a possible Williams-led franchise remapping, Chiltern is a bit of an interloper with no obvious mapping onto an NR Route.
Currently it sits in LNW Route, but they are going to be obsessed with HS2 integration soon.
Chiltern's strongest links with other TOCs currently are with XC and WMR, with EWR to come.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Well lots of ideas expressed here . I hope however that someone in the DfT is having a long hard look at the Aylesbury- Amersham- Marylebone issue. There are lots of comments about lack of capacity south of Harrow and at Marylebone. As it stands many acres of farm land to the north of Aylesbury to the MK boundary and to the east of Aylesbury are due to be concreted over and several housing estates created in the next 30 years. Aylesbury already has Garden Town status with new estates to the east of the town already built / under construction. We know from published sources that the East- West rail corridor will be accompanied by ribbon development along the route. Aylesbury and surrounds are commuter towns now. Despite Government/ Bucks CC views that employment will be generated by the Garden Town status I doubt this will be sufficient to absorb all the extra folk who will therefore be commuting even allowing for home working and likely to be going mainly in one direction- to London. The Chiltern service is already at capacity in the peak on the Amersham /LUL line and fellow posters have already highlighted the issues. In the long term sticking plaster solutions will not do and some radical options will have to be considered.

Cut the Met back to Rickmansworth with a short length of additional track from Watford South junction to keep it segregated (Rickmansworth needs to be retained for the stabling there). You then hand over the fast lines from Harrow to Rickmansworth over to Chiltern. These can then be upgraded as required, so 90-odd mph becomes more feasible, as does OHLE. You can then look at extending platforms up to 8-car lengths. Capacity at Marylebone will increasingly continue to be an issue.

Trust me , from Crossrail 1 work in the last Century , north of Harrow Met you have a very tight solum and very old embankments - some widening in the late 1950's used I believe bomb damage rubble fro London - so wiring on 25Kv is tricky to say the least and a fiendish combination of "poor" embankments and rubble make line speed increases very challenging. I have personally walked this section with the engineers and seen it first hand.

Pre WW2 and after there were plans to 4 track Croxley Junction to Rickmansworh , but this was "value engineered out" to save money.

There is also the issue of Chesham services - they would love to see a fast through service , but they weren't happy about OLE way back. They might be now though with an all day slow service (bar a few peak offerings)

 

[Chester1]

Because that doesn't deal with the issue at Marylebone (due to the need to still have stopping services to the Sudburys, etc - so all you are doing is terminating those services earlier, rather than Wycombe) and doesn't increase capacity on the middle-distance stuff.

Chiltern to OOC is, to some extent, serving Wycombe, Beaconsfield and Gerrards Cross to London flows, but the trade off in quality of that aspect vs a Liz line branch allows for additional paths to be cleared into Marylebone for extra Oxford/Midlands and/or inner trains ('Chiltern Metro' or via Amersham) while still providing more tph from those places to London. The Route Study gives a theoretical service pattern of diverting the Banbury and Wycombe trains to OOC, making the Aylesbury via HW a stopper and adding the following 5 services to destinations (vs an extra three with Crossrail): OOC-Gerrards Cross stopper, OOC-HW stopper, OOC-MK semi-fast, Marylebone-MK semi-fast and Marylebone-Stratford semi-fast. It's not how I would do it, but it shows their aims: boost the services to both South Bucks and the South Midlands.

The biggest factor though is the TfL nature of the #PurpleTrain - TfL are unlikely to be willing these days to fund infrastructure and a service that barely serves the GLA area.

That makes sense. I know it's not going to happen but I would like to see Chiltern become the main London to Birmingham ToC with 3tph with journey times below 90 minutes and using double Meridians once they are replaced by bi modes. I would then recast the WCML to remove the two VT services that terminate at New Street (adding Rugby and Watford calls to Scotland-Birmingham-London). That would free up Pendolinos to run extra services to Liverpool and Preston/Blackpool (to relieve London-Glasgow services). LNWR could run additional services depending on the number of paths available (Norton Bridge allowed 2tph extra that have not been used yet?) If HS2 is late then there will be significant capacity issues along most of the WCML if Chiltern cannot take a larger share of London-Birmingham traffic.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That makes sense. I know it's not going to happen but I would like to see Chiltern become the main London to Birmingham ToC with 3tph with journey times below 90 minutes and using double Meridians once they are replaced by bi modes. I would then recast the WCML to remove the two VT services that terminate at New Street (adding Rugby and Watford calls to Scotland-Birmingham-London). That would free up Pendolinos to run extra services to Liverpool and Preston/Blackpool (to relieve London-Glasgow services). LNWR could run additional services depending on the number of paths available (Norton Bridge allowed 2tph extra that have not been used yet?) If HS2 is late then there will be significant capacity issues along most of the WCML if Chiltern cannot take a larger share of London-Birmingham traffic.

I have never heard anything quite so ridiculous - a 2 track low speed line cannot and will not replace a 4-track 125mph mainline.

 

[Chester1]

I have never heard anything quite so ridiculous - a 2 track low speed line cannot and will not replace a 4-track 125mph mainline.

It nearly does already! I think 99 minutes vs 81 minutes on the faster services. I did state "I know its not going to happen" but that is because infrastructure investment is not worth it just to cover until 2026. 1tph using double Meridians from 2022 until start of HS2 services would be very helpful for managing WCML demand and would be feasible.

 

[Mikey C]

That makes sense. I know it's not going to happen but I would like to see Chiltern become the main London to Birmingham ToC with 3tph with journey times below 90 minutes and using double Meridians once they are replaced by bi modes. I would then recast the WCML to remove the two VT services that terminate at New Street (adding Rugby and Watford calls to Scotland-Birmingham-London). That would free up Pendolinos to run extra services to Liverpool and Preston/Blackpool (to relieve London-Glasgow services). LNWR could run additional services depending on the number of paths available (Norton Bridge allowed 2tph extra that have not been used yet?) If HS2 is late then there will be significant capacity issues along most of the WCML if Chiltern cannot take a larger share of London-Birmingham traffic.

The job of Chiltern isn't to scoop up Birmingham traffic, but to serve their main area, which is all the growing towns along the route. With limited track space and terminus space at Marylebone, Birmingham expresses would kill the service for the rest of the route

 

[Clip]

Birmingham expresses would kill the service for the rest of the route

There could be a good argument for them not doing london to birmingham at all once HS2 is up and running and make the southern half a more intensive commuter service and then doing say Banbury to Brum at the other end. Or something. a Twin commuter railway could be the answer

 

[A0]

Cut the Met back to Rickmansworth with a short length of additional track from Watford South junction to keep it segregated (Rickmansworth needs to be retained for the stabling there). You then hand over the fast lines from Harrow to Rickmansworth over to Chiltern. These can then be upgraded as required, so 90-odd mph becomes more feasible, as does OHLE. You can then look at extending platforms up to 8-car lengths. Capacity at Marylebone will increasingly continue to be an issue.

Trust me , from Crossrail 1 work in the last Century , north of Harrow Met you have a very tight solum and very old embankments - some widening in the late 1950's used I believe bomb damage rubble fro London - so wiring on 25Kv is tricky to say the least and a fiendish combination of "poor" embankments and rubble make line speed increases very challenging. I have personally walked this section with the engineers and seen it first hand.

Pre WW2 and after there were plans to 4 track Croxley Junction to Rickmansworh , but this was "value engineered out" to save money.

There is also the issue of Chesham services - they would love to see a fast through service , but they weren't happy about OLE way back. They might be now though with an all day slow service (bar a few peak offerings)

Wouldn't the need for all Chiltern services to stop at Chorleywood and Chalfont & Latimer slow them down though? How much would that off-set the improved running time they'd get by having the tracks north of Rickmansworth?

Ultimately this is all a legacy of Edward Watkin from the time when he chose to tack the GC onto the Met at Quainton in order to reduce the cost of getting to London...... that and the questionable decision by BR Midland to run down the GC which allowed LT to electrify to Amersham.......

 

[VT 390]

There could be a good argument for them not doing london to birmingham at all once HS2 is up and running and make the southern half a more intensive commuter service and then doing say Banbury to Brum at the other end. Or something. a Twin commuter railway could be the answer

But then places like Leamington Spa, Warwick and Solihull would have no direct trains to London.

 

[The Planner]

Currently it sits in LNW Route, but they are going to be obsessed with HS2 integration soon.

Wouldn't be so sure, its just another project really in the grand scheme of things and LNW will be taking Worcester off the Western soon too.

 

[Clip]

But then places like Leamington Spa, Warwick and Solihull would have no direct trains to London.

I hadnt thought it out properly but its workable with a bit of thought I should imagine

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Surely the arrival of hs2 would increase the usage as Moor Street is next to Curzon Street (the Planned hs2 Station) so it could become a major destination more so in the future than it is now.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Would this be a worthy timetable for a future franchisee? bold are services which have been added/changed

• 1tph: Stratford-upon-Avon to London Marylebone
• 2tph: Oxford to London Marylebone
• 2tph: Birmingham Snow Hill to London Marylebone
• 1tph: High Wycombe to London Marylebone
• 1tph: Milton Keynes Central to London Marylebone
• 1tp2h: Leamington Spa to Birmingham Moor Street
• 1tph: Aylesbury to London Marylebone via High Wycombe
• 1tph: Aylesbury to London Marylebone Via Amersham
• 1tph: Aylesbury Vale Parkway to London Marylebone Via Amersham
• 1tph: Birmingham Snow Hill to Oxford (potentially to Reading)

 

[Aictos]

Wouldn’t a more radical idea be if the East West franchise merged with a Chiltern franchise....

 

[The Planner]

Why have you emboldened the 1tph Wycombe to Marylebone? The Milton Keynes to Marylebone will exist as part of E-W rail though advertised as separate services. Give the Leamington local to WMT and Chiltern will have no interest in running to Oxford from Snow Hill, give that to the often proposed on here extension of a GWR. Chiltern will end up like Cross Country anyway with a significant direct award I would expect.

 

[jimm]

Would this be a worthy timetable for a future franchisee? bold are services which have been added/changed

• 1tph: Stratford-upon-Avon to London Marylebone
• 2tph: Oxford to London Marylebone
• 2tph: Birmingham Snow Hill to London Marylebone
• 1tph: High Wycombe to London Marylebone
• 1tph: Milton Keynes Central to London Marylebone
• 1tp2h: Leamington Spa to Birmingham Moor Street
• 1tph: Aylesbury to London Marylebone via High Wycombe
• 1tph: Aylesbury to London Marylebone Via Amersham
• 1tph: Aylesbury Vale Parkway to London Marylebone Via Amersham
• 1tph: Birmingham Snow Hill to Oxford (potentially to Reading)

1tph to Stratford. What for? And that's before you get to the far from minor matter of the limited line capacity on the single-line section between Hatton and Bearley Junction, which also has to accommodate the WMR Birmingham-Stratford via Solihull services.

What is needed to increase capacity between Birmingham, Oxford and Reading is, as I have said in various threads, simply to lengthen the trains used on the existing XC service, which already runs at a 2tph frequency. A measure which can be delivered without taking up yet more track capacity on what it already a very busy piece of railway.

 

[adrock1976]

Regarding the Birmingham Moor Street - Leamington Spa service, I am with The Planner that it can be transferred back to West Midlands.

In the days of Regional Railways Central, I can remember the frequency being Birmingham Snow Hill - Dorridge every 20 minutes, with one train extending every 60 minutes to Leamington Spa. In 1993, Network SouthEast ran a train every 2 hours from London Marylebone - Birmingham Snow Hill (with no fanfare or blazes of publicity - it just suddenly appeared in the local timetable), then post-privatisation, Chiltern introduced the Class 168 Clubmans inn 1998 which was tied in with the phases of their Evergreen Project. This led to a frequency increase to every 60 minutes, then to the present day 2 trains per hour.

As I had already left my native West Midlands in 1998, I believe (but am unsure) that it was the carve up of Central Trains (former Regional Railways Central pre-privatisation) in 2007 that may have caused all local trains from the Stourbridge side via Solihull to be truncated at Dorridge, with Chiltern running the present 2 hourly Moor Street - Leamington Spa service. This meant that Lapworth and Hatton had their frequency reduced from every 60 minutes to every 2 hours to and from the Solihull and Birmingham direction. The London trains maintained the 60 minute frequency at Warwick (Town, not the Parkway) to and from Leamington, Solihull, and Birmingham.

I have had a quick eyeball on the Real Time Trains website at lunchtime on a normal weekday, and it would only require one extra Class 172 (or 2 if now running in pairs) to extend one of the Dorridge terminators to Leamington every 60 minutes calling all stations as the running time is 22 minutes each way. Although the ex Worcester/Great Malvern terminator has the Newcastle - Reading a few minutes behind, the suggested extension could be held in the loop at Dorridge. The return could depart Leamington at xx:24 and arrive Dorridge at xx:46, and pick up the Worcester/Great Malvern slot as it would be behind the ex London train.