Do WCML stations have a worse service under VTWC?

[Bletchleyite]

Only the Sunday service (and odd ones on other days) runs via Northampton.

 

[Mathew S]

Al

A) The service I was asking for originally was STA to GLA
B)There are not 2 stops, there are: Rugely, Litchfield, Tamworth, Atherstone, Nuneaton, Rugby, Milton Keynes, Watford, London
C) Weekends are worse: Rugely, Litchfield, Tamworth, Atherstone, Nuneaton, Rugby, Leighton Buzzard, Northampton, Long Buckby, Milton Keynes, Watford, London

A) By GLA do you mean Glasgow? If so you have one change at Crewe, which seems reasonable to me. Journey time ~3h40 which isn't half bad either. There is a direct return journey at 17:40 from GLC, which is a journey time of 3h33, so it's not like you especially lose out in terms of journey time by having the change.
B) From Nuneaton you have 2 stops as I explained on an hourly service which leaves at xx:36 throughout the day (see http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/P64295/2018/01/15 for an example). If you mean from Stafford, then there are fast VTWC services throughout the day at xx:42 which run nonstop from Stafford to Euston. There is no reason to stop seven times, unless you deliberately opt for a stopping service.
C) Today's a weekend, so I'll use the Liverpool services which from Stafford are mostly still non-stop or in a few cases call at Nuneaton and either Milton Keynes or Watford. Either way, I'm not sure which train you'd be catching to stop in all of those places, but it would certainly be the slowest of the WMR/LNR services available.

Do you have any more assertions you'd like me to refute with some freely available evidence?

 

[E6007]

Al

A) The service I was asking for originally was STA to GLA
B)There are not 2 stops, there are: Rugely, Litchfield, Tamworth, Atherstone, Nuneaton, Rugby, Milton Keynes, Watford, London
C) Weekends are worse: Rugely, Litchfield, Tamworth, Atherstone, Nuneaton, Rugby, Leighton Buzzard, Northampton, Long Buckby, Milton Keynes, Watford, London

The order of stops on (C) is interesting! South of Rugby it's generally Northampton, Milton Keynes, Leighton Buzzard, Watford Jn, Euston

LNR (and LM before them) only operate 4 tph Sunday afternoons out of Euston versus the 7 tph off peak the rest of the week. I believe there's an intention to improve the Sunday service generally but whether that applies to the Trent Valley remains to be seen. Other than the stops south of Rugby, it is the same service as during the week.

 

[anti-pacer]

Regarding the Trent Valley services, I can see BOTH sides of this debate. On the one hand if I was travelling from Scotland or the North West to London, I wouldn't be too impressed with stopping at average sized towns in the Midlands, slowing down an already long and possibly overcrowded journey. Most of the TV towns have much shorter journey times to the capital even on LNR. On the other hand, having previously lived in Earl Shilton (near Hinckley) and used Nuneaton station to travel south, I did enjoy the non-stop 55 minutes journey time courtesy of VT. What they have now is a lesser service, no matter how much some of you try to dress it up. That's what your average passenger will see anyway.

However, like with most things in life you cannot please everyone and often compromises need to be made. I will say this though, if you're that desperate to be closer to London, move closer. London, despite what we're lead to believe isn't the 'be all and end all' of this country.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And the TV service isn't bad. Plenty of people choose to use it even if they don't need to, either for the lower fares or because they just think 350s are nicer than Pendolinos. Or because the wifi is hugely better[1] than VT's (and free, too), which is certainly a reason I have chosen it in the past when not in a hurry and needing to get some work done.

Really, to me, the only significant problems with it are that (a) it's 4 cars too short, and (b) 1st class is a sham, being less comfortable than Standard. The coming of the 350/4s and re-routeing via Stafford in December will solve both of those problems.

[1] I tweeted this a while ago and got 2 free day passes from LM to allow them to use the Tweet in publicity, though I don't think they actually did in the end.

 

[pt_mad]

To the person who asked if I have an issue with LNW?

Yes. When there is a service with 0 stops, which offers a good first class, and proper catering, along with real working wifi, and members of onboard staff, plug sockets, I'd rather not get the train that stops at 7 stops on weekdays, with no real catering, rarely plug sockets, rarely a second member of staff, sometimes 3x2 seating, rubbish wifi...

I am starting to thank the lord, you people are not the real route planners.

I can see obviously you were talking about trains from Stafford, and not Nuneaton as some people have assumed. Although the weekday LNR service doesn't stop at Watford. After Milton Keynes it's non stop to London.

LNR does offer free WiFi. Soon to be on every train. And it was at the time of introduction supposed to be the fastest wifi in the industry. They have plug sockets on 350/3s, and in first class on most 350s. Would have thought when the trains are refurbished they would kit them all out with sockets as standard but that's a guess.

And the class 350s are now one of the most reliable trains on the UK Network. So much so, I understand they earned an award last year for this http://railtube.info/2017/11/london-midland-runs-most-reliable-trains-in-the-uk-london-midland/.
Guessing a Pendolino couldn't claim that.

As for direct VT services from Stafford, I wouldn't rule out that when the West Coast franchise is re-let, which isn't that far away, there is a possibility Stafford may lose some calls. Same chance for Rugby. I wouldn't rule it out as the consultation even included a point on whether it would be worth dropping some stops, including Birmingham International and Sandwell on some services in order to speed up journey times. So I wouldn't count on Stafford being deserving of these stops as they were soon dropped at Nuneaton in 2008.

 

[DenmarkRail]

I can see obviously you were talking about trains from Stafford, and not Nuneaton as some people have assumed. Although the weekday LNR service doesn't stop at Watford. After Milton Keynes it's non stop to London.

LNR does offer free WiFi. Soon to be on every train. And it was at the time of introduction supposed to be the fastest wifi in the industry. They have plug sockets on 350/3s, and in first class on most 350s. Would have thought when the trains are refurbished they would kit them all out with sockets as standard but that's a guess.

And the class 350s are now one of the most reliable trains on the UK Network now. So much so I understand they earned an award last year for the least technical incidents per mile.

As for direct VT services from Stafford, I wouldn't rule out that when the West Coast franchise is re-let, which isn't that far away, there is a possibility Stafford may lose some calls. Same chance for Rugby. I wouldn't rule it out as the consultation even included a point on whether it would be worth dropping some stops including Birmingham International and Sandwell on some services in order to speed up journey times. So I wouldn't count on Stafford being deserving of these stops as they were soon dropped at Nuneaton in 2008.

If Stafford is dropped from any WTP services, then whoever wins, will have a fair few angry users to contend with... If Stafford looses calls, why should it be a VT station anymore?

 

[Bevan Price]

Reinstate the tunnel from the Stoke line under WCML into Basford Hall yard, but realign at the exit to provide a northbound connection?

Interesting. Where did that tunnel leave the Stoke line?

Just outside Crewe, to the south/east of the location of the current (LNWR ?) repair depot. I went that way once on a railtour in the early 1960s I don't know if it still exists or has been filled with "spoil". .

 

[pt_mad]

If Stafford is dropped from any WTP services, then whoever wins, will have a fair few angry users to contend with... If Stafford looses calls, why should it be a VT station anymore?

Same happened at Nuneaton in 2008 and was widely publicised, hence so many people on here know about it.

And Wolverhampton is soon to be a WMR station and no longer a VT station. As it pretty much only has one VT service an hour now and a shed load of WMTrains services.

It does really make you wonder why Stafford and Rugby are VT stations. They are by far weighed in favour of LNR in terms of number of services calling there. Vs Milton Keynes being a LNR station, which must provide tonnes of passengers for VT and even has VT staff working there.

Likewise Oxenholme and Penrith are VT stations but don't exactly have loads of calls.

 

[Mathew S]

If Stafford is dropped from any WTP services, then whoever wins, will have a fair few angry users to contend with... If Stafford looses calls, why should it be a VT station anymore?

Stafford is already to switch to being a WMR station though, I thought?

 

[pt_mad]

Stafford is already to switch to being a WMR station though, I thought?

No, that's Wolverhampton.

 

[DenmarkRail]

Stafford is already to switch to being a WMR station though, I thought?

No, we're always a VT station. VT put millions into refurbs of it.

 

[Mathew S]

I think there's a point to be made here that yes, many stations on the WCML south of Crewe receive a lesser service from Virgin now than they used to, say, 15 years ago. But that at least in part that's because they have an increased WMR/LNR service. Not great if you want to travel from, say, the Trent Valley to Scotland, but it has freed up Virgin to provide more and faster capacity long distance.
Swings and roundabouts.

 

[pt_mad]

No, we're always a VT station. VT put millions into refurbs of it.

Why though. When there's usually 2 VT calls there per hour off peak Vs 6 LNR services per hour possibly could be more shortly?

 

[Mathew S]

No, we're always a VT station. VT put millions into refurbs of it.

Be that as it may, I am under the impression that it is to transfer to WMR (I could be mistaken, but I'm sure I heard that from someone on here in the WMR franchise thread).

I admire your loyalty to Virgin, but if the station gets transferred in the new franchise agreement then that's the way it is I'm afraid.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It does really make you wonder why Stafford and Rugby are VT stations. They are by far weighed in favour of LNR in terms of number of services calling there. Vs Milton Keynes being a LNR station, which must provide tonnes of passengers for VT and even has VT staff working there.

For historical reasons. During the LM franchise the LM service at those stations was increased from just 1tph Northampton-Birmingham to the present 4tph (3 Brum and 1 Trent Valley).

 

[pt_mad]

For historical reasons. During the LM franchise the LM service at those stations was increased from just 1tph Northampton-Birmingham to the present 4tph (3 Brum and 1 Trent Valley).

But so was Wolverhampton (a VT station historically). And it hasn't stopped that being transferred to WMR. Could we rule out that when the invitation to tender goes out for the West Coast Partnership, that it could be in there that Stafford and Rugby could be planned to transfer to the West Mids franchise at some point?


Likewise, when we talk about not stopping long distance services such as Scotland services at town stations. Why do Grantham and Newark on the ECML have some Edinburgh's stopping there off peak? It's the same principle. One wonders whether it's a ticking time bomb that, when the Azumas are fully introduced, leads to a new timetable where Newark, Grantham, Retford and Northallerton could be cut out to the same extent some of the West Coast stations were with the introduction of the Pendolinos. If not, then why do the town stations on the ECML manage to continue to be served at times by Scotland trains?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm not saying it won't - all I'm saying is that the reason Rugby is a VT station is historical, because the majority operator used to be VT, it just isn't now.

The flow owner on the MKC to Euston fares has changed similarly - it's this that means it is one of the few stations served by 2 main TOCs with TOC specific tickets for both. The reason these exist is that VT used to be the majority operator and set the fares, so a Silverlink only fare was allowed (which became LM then LNR Only), but then with increases in service this was changed over so LM/LNR set the fares, at which point a VT Only fare was allowed, but the old TOC specific fares can be retained, just no new ones can be added.

 

[pt_mad]

I'm not saying it won't - all I'm saying is that the reason Rugby is a VT station is historical, because the majority operator used to be VT, it just isn't now.

The flow owner on the MKC to Euston fares has changed similarly - it's this that means it is one of the few stations served by 2 main TOCs with TOC specific tickets for both. The reason these exist is that VT used to be the majority operator and set the fares, so a Silverlink only fare was allowed (which became LM then LNR Only), but then with increases in service this was changed over so LM/LNR set the fares, at which point a VT Only fare was allowed, but the old TOC specific fares can be retained, just no new ones can be added.

Oh right. Good insight. It's strange how VT staff dispatch services at Milton Keynes. Why don't they just have VT run the station, or have LNR staff dispatch VT services?

 

[DenmarkRail]

I don't have a specific loyalty to VT, just a loyalty to fast trains which offer a better service, which is VT. LNW just does not offer a service, which makes me think "I'll take a train" where VT makes me think "I can get a train in 1.3 hours, WOW!"

Many think this, and many would quit taking the train to certainly London... I for one, would rather go to Reading and take CrossRail, rather than sitting on a slow 3x2 train with dismal services.

 

[Confused147]

Does it?

Personally, I think a better rail service overall is made up by having a consistent timetable and service, and quality connections to enable "non standard" journeys to be made just as well.

Didn't I say One of the things that make a good rail service is by having a direct service

 

[Mathew S]

I don't have a specific loyalty to VT, just a loyalty to fast trains which offer a better service, which is VT. LNW just does not offer a service, which makes me think "I'll take a train" where VT makes me think "I can get a train in 1.3 hours, WOW!"

Many think this, and many would quit taking the train to certainly London... I for one, would rather go to Reading and take CrossRail, rather than sitting on a slow 3x2 train with dismal services.

Even though you'd be more than doubling the length of your journey? It does feel a little like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

 

[DenmarkRail]

Even though you'd be more than doubling the length of your journey? It does feel a little like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Speed is important, but I'd rather have a decent comfortable train, with decent service onboard, and good first class, which goes slow, than a slightly faster train (Not by much) which has virtually no amenities.

Either way, Stafford on Virgin Trains is here to stay, and I will use that, and if the need ever arises (very unlikely) I'll fight tooth and claw for it to stay...

 

[tbtc]

Absolutly not, I WILL NOT trade a VT service for a LNW service stopping everywhere... I want to get to London in 80 minuites, not 2 hours

The LM services are hourly, and stop at stupid stops... Take virtually 2 hours on a weekday, and sometimes 2.5 hours at a weekend. That is too long for my usage. The VTWC service takes an 1.3 hours, and stops no where. That is a good service. If the LM became the majority, and the VT the minority services, then I'd have to say, I would rather get a CrossCountry to Reading, and get Crossrail to London. Not because of time, but because I don't want to get a train that is stopping every 10 minuites, without a real catering service, and real first class.

If they changed the stopping pattern, to be more like STA-NUN-EUS, then it would be better, but anymore than 1 stop would be tragic. London Midland / LNW just can't appeal to people who use the service regularly... Stafford people don't want to go to Leighton Buzzard or Long Buckby.

I've made this issue clear in the thread before... I'd rather retain VT services, with no intermediate stops, than gaining LM services... Only one off travelers use it, it is just too slow for it to be sustainable.

Is Stafford more important than Nottingham/ Norwich?

Can you explain why Stafford deserves a faster London service than Nottingham/ Norwich?

Stafford people don't want to go to Leighton Buzzard or Long Buckby? They probably don't go to Glasgow on a daily basis either, but you are demanding an hourly Scottish service for your town.

I love the idea that your dislike of a "slow" LWR service that has intermediate stops (intermediate stops!) means you'd rather sit in a First Class seat on the luxurious non-stop Crossrail service from Reading to London though! You may be in for a shock when the 345 pulls into your platform at Reading, mind...

When there is a service with 0 stops, which offers a good first class, and proper catering, along with real working wifi, and members of onboard staff, plug sockets, I'd rather not get the train that stops at 7 stops on weekdays, with no real catering, rarely plug sockets, rarely a second member of staff, sometimes 3x2 seating, rubbish wifi...

I am starting to thank the lord, you people are not the real route planners.

How many cities have a London service with no intermediate stops? If Manchester/ Leeds don't warrant one then why does little Stafford deserve one?

Al

A) The service I was asking for originally was STA to GLA
B)There are not 2 stops, there are: Rugely, Litchfield, Tamworth, Atherstone, Nuneaton, Rugby, Milton Keynes, Watford, London
C) Weekends are worse: Rugely, Litchfield, Tamworth, Atherstone, Nuneaton, Rugby, Leighton Buzzard, Northampton, Long Buckby, Milton Keynes, Watford, London

That sounds fair enough - for a place of Stafford's size

Regarding the Trent Valley services, I can see BOTH sides of this debate. On the one hand if I was travelling from Scotland or the North West to London, I wouldn't be too impressed with stopping at average sized towns in the Midlands, slowing down an already long and possibly overcrowded journey

That's the problem. There are lots of average sized towns in the Midlands.

And apparently, from reading this thread, they all "deserve" a non-stop service to London.

But, at the same time, from reading this thread, I've learnt that Watford and Milton Keynes deserve lots of regular services to "the north" (and/or Scotland).

So we need a non-stop service from London to Nuneaton, a a non-stop service from London to Tamworth, a non-stop service from London to Rugely, a non-stop service from London to Lichfield, a non-stop service from London to Stafford but at the same time we should slow down services from big cities to London.

Should be an easy one for the planners to resolve....

 

[Bletchleyite]

Oh right. Good insight. It's strange how VT staff dispatch services at Milton Keynes. Why don't they just have VT run the station, or have LNR staff dispatch VT services?

No idea, I'm afraid...I think VT like having their own staff there.

 

[anti-pacer]

That's the problem. There are lots of average sized towns in the Midlands.

And apparently, from reading this thread, they all "deserve" a non-stop service to London.

But, at the same time, from reading this thread, I've learnt that Watford and Milton Keynes deserve lots of regular services to "the north" (and/or Scotland).

So we need a non-stop service from London to Nuneaton, a a non-stop service from London to Tamworth, a non-stop service from London to Rugely, a non-stop service from London to Lichfield, a non-stop service from London to Stafford but at the same time we should slow down services from big cities to London.

Should be an easy one for the planners to resolve....

In addition, we also need InterCity stock with "Pullman" style restaurants on-board, to operate these service at 10 minute frequencies all day and night.

OK they'll be mostly empty, but it'll keep the clearly demanding passengers from the Trent Valley happy.

 

[pt_mad]

Is Stafford more important than Nottingham/ Norwich?

Can you explain why Stafford deserves a faster London service than Nottingham/ Norwich?

Stafford people don't want to go to Leighton Buzzard or Long Buckby? They probably don't go to Glasgow on a daily basis either, but you are demanding an hourly Scottish service for your town.

I love the idea that your dislike of a "slow" LWR service that has intermediate stops (intermediate stops!) means you'd rather sit in a First Class seat on the luxurious non-stop Crossrail service from Reading to London though! You may be in for a shock when the 345 pulls into your platform at Reading, mind...



How many cities have a London service with no intermediate stops? If Manchester/ Leeds don't warrant one then why does little Stafford deserve one?



That sounds fair enough - for a place of Stafford's size



That's the problem. There are lots of average sized towns in the Midlands.

And apparently, from reading this thread, they all "deserve" a non-stop service to London.

But, at the same time, from reading this thread, I've learnt that Watford and Milton Keynes deserve lots of regular services to "the north" (and/or Scotland).

So we need a non-stop service from London to Nuneaton, a a non-stop service from London to Tamworth, a non-stop service from London to Rugely, a non-stop service from London to Lichfield, a non-stop service from London to Stafford but at the same time we should slow down services from big cities to London.

Should be an easy one for the planners to resolve....

Haha

 

[pt_mad]

Either way, Stafford on Virgin Trains is here to stay, and I will use that, and if the need ever arises (very unlikely) I'll fight tooth and claw for it to stay...

But how can you be so sure?

The invitation to tender hasn't gone out yet. What if it requires the new bidders to omit stops on some services in order to speed up services to key cities, as part of the franchise agreement?

 

[AlterEgo]

I would rather get a CrossCountry to Reading, and get Crossrail to London. Not because of time, but because I don't want to get a train that is stopping every 10 minuites, without a real catering service, and real first class.

The XC service stops at a fair few places! The on board service is also poor. Granted it’s a better experience than LM but in no way comparable to VTWC.

 

[SeanM1997]

I wish the London-Glasgow service called at Crewe to provide a more frequent service to Warrington, Wigan and Preston, as well as better connectivity for some passengers. An hourly service is good, but sometimes it is only 5 coaches and can be overcrowded. Stopping the London to Glasgow can help overcome these barriers. It would also mean all Virgin trains stopping at Crewe, and I like that idea of trains not going fast through Crewe - but that's just a personal opinion