The Northern and WalesnBorders franchises have a lot of political clout behind them, so the no growth aspect gets complained about a lot. The East Midlands franchise seems to have been set up on similarly parsimonious terms, but without the same level of attention.
You could even argue that the poor divorce settlement (from Central Trains days) dealt EMT with a worse fleet than the area had had, so EMTs initial situation was poorer than the Northern/ WalesnBorders franchises (who at least inherited all of the stock that operated their routes whereas from day one EMT were running shorter trains due to the three coach 170s going to LM/XC meaning the Liverpool Norwich service was downgraded to two coaches).
However Stagecoach have managed the situation that they inherited well. Whilst theyve been dependent upon cascades from elsewhere (FGW 180s to Hull releasing a handful of short 222s, LM 150s to Manchester releasing a handful of 156s)
and have lost almost as many coaches as theyve gained (given the length of the HSTs that moved to the ECML)
theyve managed to double the length of Liverpool Nottingham services, increase the frequency to Matlock, double the frequency of Nottingham Lincoln services and take on the London Corby service (whilst refurbishing the 158s to a decent standard despite not having a huge fleet to facilitate units being out of use for long periods).
Pretty impressive considering how little theyve had to work with. So Id be happy if Stagecoach continued in operation, though I have no idea of the quality of each bid Im not such a blinkered fanboy that Id prefer a weaker bid to win.
Initiatives like 222s to Liverpool on Grand National weekends, HSTs to Lincoln Market in December/ Skegness in the summer at least show willing the kind of integrated approach that we would take for granted in an ideal world but is much better than many TOCs manage.
Theres still work to do. Four coaches quickly filled up on the Liverpool Nottingham services (some are still two coaches, like the 16:40ish that I got back from Nottingham last week, which looked horribly full departing Sheffield an hour later). Hopefully the SWT 158/159s will come on the market before long.
I dont see the point in running 185s on Liverpool Nottingham, unless you shift the franchise boundaries to run this service in the same TOC as the parallel Manchester Airport Cleethorpes route (I can see the logic in one TOC running doubled up 185s on all Hope Valley expresses, I can see that neither route fits neatly into TPE/EMT, I can see that there may be economies of scale in running both from the same Manchester depot that has handled 185s for some time, I have no opinion over whether that TOC be EMT or TPE though).
Im not bothered about through services to Norwich or not there are pros and cons if you want to have cross Nottingham links then I think that people in Sheffield would value at least some through service to Skegness in summer months (even if just a token HST from Neville Hill at weekends in the school holidays).
The Lincolnshire services all have average speeds of under 60mph, so I could see the argument for 230s replacing the 153s there (given the length of time youd need to take a 153 out of operation to upgrade it, the cost of doing so to single coach trains, the disproportionate reduction in seating to provide a universal toilet etc).
Could you run the ex-Central Trains services with just 230s and 158s? Itd make things a lot simpler. The design of the 230s (where the parts that need maintenance are located in one removable section) would lend themselves to rural operation i.e. they could run to Barton or Skegness for days at a time without needing to return to base. Just send someone over in a van to swap components and fuel them up rather than running long ECS back to a home depot.
Service enhancements? Only three/ hour from Derby to Nottingham seems quite lightweight (with a half hour gap at times), considering the size of the places and the popular/frequent coach service). But then is that a responsibility for XC or for EMT to address?
Boston to Peterborough seems a neglected market (no through trains, poor connections, it can take at least an hour and a half to do a journey that is only around thirty miles for crows) not everything needs to run all the way through to Skegness. You'd only need a couple of extra DMUs to transform frequencies in Lincolnshire.
Just a general beefing up of the Lincolnshire services would be good, though this will depend on subsidies and signal boxes. How do you move towards clockface times when you are dependent upon school traffic? On infrequent routes, is it better to have a timetable thats easy to remember or one focussed on good peak time arrivals/ departures? Is it better to give the Lincoln Grimsby and Lincoln Doncaster lines a service based around local commuters or one based on long distance connections (at Doncaster/ Newark)?
Crewe to Nottingham is an idea that gets raised quite often though I appreciate the problem of reversals at Derby.
For me, the XC Turbostar routes would sit better with EMT, but I can see the reasons why they arent (complications of another TOC at New Street, cutting the Cardiff link, minimising terminating services at New Street etc). Not a priority I guess.
The ex-Midland Mainline services are harder to predict, I suppose a lot depends on how soon electrification is expected to reach Sheffield (in terms of what stock to order/ how long to wait until you go fully electric).
Is it worth having a microfleet of 100mph EMUs for Corby services (if you arent ordering electric-capable trains for London Leicester services in the short term)? Would it be easier to use the same 125mph electric-capable trains to Corby? Does Corby even need 100mph? Would a 125mph 800-equivalent get there any faster than a 100mph 377-equivalent? If the latter then would the route sit better as part of TSGN (not an extension of Thameslink, no 700s, but using the same stock as well see on the Great Northern for peak extras). I really dont know.
Something like an 800 would be nice on the MML, but how do you balance the need for long trains with the short platforms at Long Eaton/ Beeston/ Loughborough etc? If MML platforms cant take 10x26m trains then any five coach 800 is wasting capacity at the busiest stations (i.e. 5x26m means youd need to either run some 10x26m services unless you come up with some convoluted portion working
SDO is acceptable in circumstances like the one HST a day on a rural line but really not ideal on regular services).