East Cost Franchise Retender

[island]

They won't. I'm pretty sure Virgin are not allowed to bid as they are not using all the slots they already own (and lease a few out profitably to US airlines - something the authorities don't want to happen with the slots from BMI). If Virgin's slot count was maxed out then they might have a point about BA/BMI. (Plus Virgin tend to duplicate long standing BA routes rather then trying to find a niche to new destinations)

Virgin also doesn't have any short-haul planes.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

They won't. I'm pretty sure Virgin are not allowed to bid as they are not using all the slots they already own (and lease a few out profitably to US airlines - something the authorities don't want to happen with the slots from BMI). If Virgin's slot count was maxed out then they might have a point about BA/BMI. (Plus Virgin tend to duplicate long standing BA routes rather then trying to find a niche to new destinations)

I agree. Now that BA has completed the BMI purchase Virgin will have to put up or shut up. Can't see Branson getting much out of it.
He could buy BMI Regional for UK routes but it looks like going to an ex-BMI group based in Aberdeen.
He needs a big win right now - Inter City West Coast.

 

[VTPreston_Tez]

Just wondering; who is actually bidding?

 

[fhs man 2]

Virgin also doesn't have any short-haul planes.

It's Virgin the most unexpected company in the world they could get smaller planes at the snap of a hand.

 

[cal12]

ok my ideal pattern would be

2tph kings cross to leeds with 1tp2h to Bradford
2tp1h kings cross to Edinburgh
5tpd to extended to aberdeen
1tp2h extended to Glasgow again (queen street would be ideal with a shorter journey time when the line is electric but i know it wouldnt fit a full mk4 set so central it has to be)
2tpd to extended to inverness.
newark terminating trains to be extended to york with a few trains going through to middlesborough

 

[calc7]

ok my ideal pattern would be

2tph kings cross to leeds with 1tp2h to Bradford
2tp1h kings cross to Edinburgh
5tpd to extended to aberdeen
1tp2h extended to Glasgow again (queen street would be ideal with a shorter journey time when the line is electric but i know it wouldnt fit a full mk4 set so central it has to be)
2tpd to extended to inverness.
newark terminating trains to be extended to york with a few trains going through to middlesborough

With the extra stock and paths coming from where?

 

[HST Power]

How much longer would trains take if they diverted via the Hertford Loop?

You could get some more trains by doing that on the all stoppers to Newark.

East Coast services? I don't think you could do that, because the Hertford Loop is only two track, and it has a top speed of 75mph.

Just wondering; who is actually bidding?

I second that. I haven't read the thread in much detail but do we have any ideas yet?

 

[HSTEd]

East Coast services? I don't think you could do that, because the Hertford Loop is only two track, and it has a top speed of 75mph.

Well currently there are three trains per hour between Alexandra Palace and Hertford North, with one of these continuing north to Stevenage/Letchworth Garden City.

Now, the timetabled transit is 29 minutes between Palace and HFN, which is a distance of ~14.6 miles, which would be tarnsitted in roughly 12 minutes if the train was to sustain 75mph throughout.

This all works out that there might be two paths an hour free on the Hertford Loop if the InterCity trains transit the route at the linespeed of 75mph without slowing, and the line is resignalled to allow ~2 minute headways (as could happen when ERTMS arrives). These would be catching up to the two trains that terminate at HFN. (So in front of one of the terminators and the train that continues through Stevenage).

This is all very iffy, however if newer stock was to be deployed on the Hertford Loop these paths could be firmed up due to the reduced transit time of the stopping services.
I think the cost is worth it considering the fact that the current 313s are getting on.

But anyway, there may be two slightly iffy paths on the Hertford Loop that allow it to be transited at full line speed and thus only loose a few minutes relative to the regular route.

I would recommend that these paths be used on secondary services such as any future Lincoln trains and those operated by GC or to destinations like Skipton where the convenience of a single seat service is likely more of a factor than shaving a few minutes of headline times.

A Cl313 only has 880hp and one third of its axles powered, you could easily shave five minutes off that journey time with modern stock IMO.

 

[David10]

I second that. I haven't read the thread in much detail but do we have any ideas yet?

The process won't start until end of this year when expressions of interest are sought. Think its safe to assume Abellio, Arriva, First, Renfe, SNCF and Virgin will be interested.

 

[Failed Unit]

I wonder what would be possible with the existing stock. We have some long layovers at Edinburgh at the moment but Newark, York, Leeds and Newcastle all seem to be reasonable.

An extension to Bradford would be wonderful, but that would mean an extra set.
Extending all Newark terminators to York would also mean an extra set
Extending all Newcastle terminators to Edinburgh would take an extra 2 sets.

My dream would be for East Coast to get some 395s to Operate the hourly London - York service and then extend all Newcastle terminators to Edinburgh. Not sure if there is a demand for hourly to Bradford.

The open access operators are interesting. I wish they could be used as a catalyst for East Coast to drop stations. ie Hull trains take all services to Hull. I would like to also see the Lincoln service re-routed via Spalding once the route is upgraded. Say London - Newcastle / Leeds calling Peterborough, Spalding, Sleaford, Lincoln, Gainsborough, Doncaster. Can't see it happening and not sure if SDO will be needed as although HSTs have called at all the stations (not sure about Spalding TBH), this is not in regular service. BR used to stop at Sleaford and Gainsborough during the ECML electrifcation for passengers for Grantham and Retford.

 

[Stats]

It's not long now till we get the government's thinking on the East Coast franchise. The consultation document should be published imminently according to the Thameslink consultation.

This consultation is taking place at a similar time to the consultations for the new South Eastern and Intercity East Coast franchises, due to the planned and potential service transfers between franchise areas. This is to give consultees a more detailed picture of each of the franchises and inform responses to the individual consultations.

Respondents may also like to refer to the InterCity East Coast Franchise Consultation and the South East Franchise Consultation documents, which will be published by the Department at a similar time to this combined franchise consultation document.

 

[jopsuk]

Well currently there are three trains per hour between Alexandra Palace and Hertford North, with one of these continuing north to Stevenage/Letchworth Garden City.

Now, the timetabled transit is 29 minutes between Palace and HFN, which is a distance of ~14.6 miles, which would be tarnsitted in roughly 12 minutes if the train was to sustain 75mph throughout.

This all works out that there might be two paths an hour free on the Hertford Loop if the InterCity trains transit the route at the linespeed of 75mph without slowing, and the line is resignalled to allow ~2 minute headways (as could happen when ERTMS arrives). These would be catching up to the two trains that terminate at HFN. (So in front of one of the terminators and the train that continues through Stevenage).

This is all very iffy, however if newer stock was to be deployed on the Hertford Loop these paths could be firmed up due to the reduced transit time of the stopping services.
I think the cost is worth it considering the fact that the current 313s are getting on.

But anyway, there may be two slightly iffy paths on the Hertford Loop that allow it to be transited at full line speed and thus only loose a few minutes relative to the regular route.

I would recommend that these paths be used on secondary services such as any future Lincoln trains and those operated by GC or to destinations like Skipton where the convenience of a single seat service is likely more of a factor than shaving a few minutes of headline times.

A Cl313 only has 880hp and one third of its axles powered, you could easily shave five minutes off that journey time with modern stock IMO.

Isn't Hertford-Stevenage being effectively (for operational purposes) singled for a while as part of the ERTMS project testing?

 

[A-driver]

Isn't Hertford-Stevenage being effectively (for operational purposes) singled for a while as part of the ERTMS project testing?

During the off peak it is, yes. New crossovers going in south of Hertford, north of mole wood and at Langley south junction.

 

[jon0844]

When we start getting trains coming from the Thameslink side, the ECML is definitely going to need something happening on the Hertford Loop for diversions.

I really do fear that the already tight pathing on the ECML will take a huge hit as and when we see lots of trains from way beyond King's Cross, like Brighton, coming through late and screwing everything up.

We already have quite a few FCC services delayed via the Welwyn viaduct as it is, but it's nearly always factored in, and usually only an issue London bound - as trains have been delayed from far further north. Soon we'll have the same problems, but possibly far worse, northbound.

Maybe I'm worrying unnecessarily, but if there was a way to divert some trains then it could make all the difference.

 

[philjo]

I think the York/Newark stoppers should also call at Huntingdon if possible as Huntingdon goes not get any fast services off-peak. the Newark one should at least go to Doncaster even if it can't go through to York.

Hopefully the Harrogate loop can be wired in the medium term so the York stopper can use electric stock & after York run via Harrogate to Leeds & return as a Leeds-KX service (& vv for the other direction giving Harrogate a roughly hourly service to KX alternately via Leeds and York) - though as many of the york & some Leeds services are using HSTs I suppose they could try this out in the meantime using the HSTs & put electrics on the Newarks.

 

[stut]

From a purely selfish point of view, I'd like to see the peak fast FCC service patterns extended to form a York stopper, once all the platform extensions are done. KGX-SVG-BIW-SNO-HUN-PBO-GRA-NNG-RET-DON-YRK. You're reusing valuable paths in the peaks, and providing a decent set of connections up the east coast.

Note that KGX-BIW-SNO-HUN-PBO currently takes 64 minutes in a 365 vs EC's 51 minutes for KGX-SVG-PBO.

 

[Failed Unit]

From a purely selfish point of view, I'd like to see the peak fast FCC service patterns extended to form a York stopper, once all the platform extensions are done. KGX-SVG-BIW-SNO-HUN-PBO-GRA-NNG-RET-DON-YRK. You're reusing valuable paths in the peaks, and providing a decent set of connections up the east coast.

Note that KGX-BIW-SNO-HUN-PBO currently takes 64 minutes in a 365 vs EC's 51 minutes for KGX-SVG-PBO.

Use a 365 for the service (WAGN proposed this a long time ago but only to Doncaster)

 

[A-driver]

From a purely selfish point of view, I'd like to see the peak fast FCC service patterns extended to form a York stopper, once all the platform extensions are done. KGX-SVG-BIW-SNO-HUN-PBO-GRA-NNG-RET-DON-YRK. You're reusing valuable paths in the peaks, and providing a decent set of connections up the east coast.

Note that KGX-BIW-SNO-HUN-PBO currently takes 64 minutes in a 365 vs EC's 51 minutes for KGX-SVG-PBO.

They don't have the paths for this. 365s were fitted with NRN and cleared for 110mph for these services but then hull trains came along and nicked the paths.

 

[tbtc]

Extending all Newark terminators to York would also mean an extra set

That would be A Good Thing - it'd also allow XC to divert their Doncaster services via Leeds instead (since East Coast would be providing an hourly Doncaster - York service).

Extending all Newcastle terminators to Edinburgh would take an extra 2 sets

I'm not sure about this - the hundred miles between the cities is pretty much all double track, with freight plus stoppers from Newcastle to Morpeth and Drem to Edinburgh, so it might be hard to find additional paths.

I think that the York plan would be a better use of stock, given the two options.

 

[MattRobinson]

I like the idea of a 12 car unit running the Leeds services but splitting off to run regional services around Leeds. We don't have any suitable stock on the network at present, but if we could spec something which can split up to allow a service which runs to Leeds as normal and then splits (splits could happen in other places, such as just outside Shipley, etc) to run services to Skipton, Bradford and Harrogate? Similarly for the Scottish services- 12 car services which split in Edinburgh to let services run to Glasgow, Aberdeen and Inverness?

 

[philjo]

The 07:52 and 09:52 services from Aberdeen currently call at York in the hours that the stopper does not run from York so at a minimum these 2 services need to be covered for onward connections.

I think there should be a couple of extra Lincoln services. In particular the 16:08 KX-Newark should be extended to Lincoln (it is a HST already) & provide an evening return to London. Probably also need an 08:08 KX-Lincoln & return to allow for business travel to Lincoln with the return providing a mid-morning off-peak service to London.


HT/GC could join/divide some services together at Doncaster or probably Retford as the platforms are in a loop there to share a single path to Kings Cross as both services use 180s.

 

[Failed Unit]

They don't have the paths for this. 365s were fitted with NRN and cleared for 110mph for these services but then hull trains came along and nicked the paths.

I didn't realise that it had got that close. Were GNER freinds or enemies of the proposal? I would have sorted out the issue of the infrequent service between some stations a long time ago because of the skip stopping. I know if you really want to go by rail between Retford and Newark pre May 2011 you could have some long waits!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That would be A Good Thing - it'd also allow XC to divert their Doncaster services via Leeds instead (since East Coast would be providing an hourly Doncaster - York service).



I'm not sure about this - the hundred miles between the cities is pretty much all double track, with freight plus stoppers from Newcastle to Morpeth and Drem to Edinburgh, so it might be hard to find additional paths.

I think that the York plan would be a better use of stock, given the two options.

I would agree to be honest, East Coast do run every 30 minutes on bank holidays so the paths do exist. But I don't know if some frieght trains are not running as a result.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The 07:52 and 09:52 services from Aberdeen currently call at York in the hours that the stopper does not run from York so at a minimum these 2 services need to be covered for onward connections.

I think there should be a couple of extra Lincoln services. In particular the 16:08 KX-Newark should be extended to Lincoln (it is a HST already) & provide an evening return to London. Probably also need an 08:08 KX-Lincoln & return to allow for business travel to Lincoln with the return providing a mid-morning off-peak service to London.


HT/GC could join/divide some services together at Doncaster or probably Retford as the platforms are in a loop there to share a single path to Kings Cross as both services use 180s.

East Coast has already applied to plug this gap. All Newark services to be extended to York and 2 extra's at 0608 and 0808. I have not seen if this is approved yet.

http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/nav.1258

 

[David10]

East Coast has already applied to plug this gap. All Newark services to be extended to York and 2 extra's at 0608 and 0808. I have not seen if this is approved yet.

Application has been withdrawn.

 

[Failed Unit]

Application has been withdrawn.

Interesting, couldn't find a spare HST or pathing problems? I did always wonder why EMT or FGW would give up a HST (although XC may be have being happy to hire one as they don't use them all)

 

[David10]

Pathing

 

[Failed Unit]

Pathing

That will explain why I can't read the full document on the website. Maybe if they feel they can get hold of a spare HST they should extend the Newark's to Lincoln instead.

 

[David10]

Maybe if they feel they can get hold of a spare HST they should extend the Newark's to Lincoln instead.

Not enough demand hence why they never started. Has been suggested that EC only operate the Newarks to keep Open Access Operators from getting the paths.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

didn't realise that it had got that close. Were GNER freinds or enemies of the proposal? I would have sorted out the issue of the infrequent service between some stations a long time ago because of the skip stopping. I know if you really want to go by rail between Retford and Newark pre May 2011 you could have some long waits!


There was an unholy row pre Hatfield between GNER (who wanted to run more Leeds svcs , WAGN who wanted to extend PBO - Doncaster and the fledglin Hull Trains - to cut a long story short - the compromise was GNER (who hired in 373/2 for the White Rose trains) and Hull who were allowed 3 return paths.

The WAGN options were quite badly planned , and in the event , not running them was probably the right judgement by the ORR , as the Hatfield crises would have destroyed the services in any case , - as performance plummetted to unknown levels.

 

[Failed Unit]

Not enough demand hence why they never started. Has been suggested that EC only operate the Newarks to keep Open Access Operators from getting the paths.

Unfortunately I can't disagree with you there :cry:

The only realistic hope of Lincoln seeing a regular service from London is via the joint line if an operator uses it for route knowledge. Again not really going to happen considering the time penalty.

Peterborough - Doncaster is typically 50mins - 1 hour depending on the number of stops. I suspect that via Lincoln post improvements you will stuggle to get Peterborough - Lincoln under 90 minutes. There is no way Grand Central / Hull trains would gain enough revenue from Lincoln customers for the detour to off-set what they lose for the slower journey (At least 30 minutes) from Hull / Bradford or Sunderland.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The WAGN options were quite badly planned , and in the event , not running them was probably the right judgement by the ORR , as the Hatfield crises would have destroyed the services in any case , - as performance plummetted to unknown levels.

Yes I can see why, yes you are 4 track until South of Grantham, but then I don't think the slows are 100mph. Then you have to squeeze it on the 2 track to Retford. Probably hold at Retford for a little while to let some 125mph trains to pass. Then rush to Doncaster. I suspect if paths could be found they may be a little slow and if any problem happened they WAGN trains would be stuck in loops.

 

[sprinterguy]

The open access operators are interesting. I wish they could be used as a catalyst for East Coast to drop stations. ie Hull trains take all services to Hull.

I'd rather see the ECML open access operations absorbed into the East Coast franchise, where I think those destinations would be better served: The Newark terminators could become a bi-hourly service to/from Hull, replacing Hull Trains, GCs' Bradford services could operate as an extension of ECs' existing Leeds services to provide a more attractive, less tediously slow service. This would probably be less palatable now that the IEP order has been scaled back with regards to the East Coast, although then again it might provide more justification for the IEP trains.

As part of a franchised TOC, services from London to the likes of Hull and Bradford would be relatively safeguarded, whereas they are always going to be under threat of disappearing while operated under an open access agreement.