EMR Liverpool-East Midlands a portion working

[Philip]

Could some good use be put to the second set of the Liverpool-Nottingham services (from December) by using the second set to split the train at Sheffield and have portions to Nottingham and then one to Derby and Leicester following a few minutes behind? I don't think 4-6 coaches are needed between Sheffield and Nottingham, so why not create a new direct link between Liverpool/Manchester and Derby/Leicester with the extra set? You could probably utilize the whole 185 fleet with such a service, particularly if a handful of the Leicester portions were extended to London St Pancras.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Could some good use be put to the second set of the Liverpool-Nottingham services (from December) by using the second set to split the train at Sheffield and have portions to Nottingham and then one to Derby and Leicester following a few minutes behind? I don't think 4-6 coaches are needed between Sheffield and Nottingham, so why not create a new direct link between Liverpool/Manchester and Derby/Leicester with the extra set? You could probably utilize the whole 185 fleet with such a service, particularly if a handful of the Leicester portions were extended to London St Pancras.

There isn’t an extra path on the hope valley or at Manchester

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

Also no capacity at London St Pancras either

 

[Hardcastle]

Am currently on the 1846 ex Nottingham to Liverpool Lime Street & it's very busy so my answer would be no.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

There isn’t an extra path on the hope valley or at Manchester

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

Also no capacity at London St Pancras either

My reading of the post is no extra path is needed for Manchester / Hope Valley as it proposes to split the existing train at Sheffield - this would require a new path Sheffield to Derby & Leicester which might be a problem out of Sheffield (and might cause capacity issues at times on the Sheffield - Nottingham leg).
St Pancras was suggested for a handful of services, perhaps wishful thinking?

 

[JonathanH]

You could probably utilize the whole 185 fleet with such a service, particularly if a handful of the Leicester portions were extended to London St Pancras.

They are procuring a fleet of 33 810s for London to Nottingham / Sheffield. There is no chance of 185s running on this route.

Running Sheffield to Leicester via Derby would be duplication to an existing half-hourly service.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

Running Sheffield to Leicester via Derby would be duplication to an existing half-hourly service.

But would provide a link between Manchester and these cities without the need to change.

EDIT: I would suggest one of the two St Pancras Leicester Sheffield trains each hour be extended to Manchester using the extra hourly path in the Hope Valley upgrade spec. to provide such a link but of course there will not be sufficient trains in the new MML fleet to enable this.

 

[Gareth]

I don't think we should really be splitting/joining anything if it can be reasonably avoided. It carries a reliability risk that's especially pertinent on a busy network such as the one in this country.

 

[Philip]

The question is whether the benefits from the introduction of new direct services between two large North West cities and two large East Midlands cities outweighs the drawbacks of a less reliable operation. Split working still happens quite a lot so if the timings aren't too tight I don't see why it'd cause a big problem.

Two coaches between Sheffield and Nottingham may not be enough, but if 185s eventually replace the 158s then it would be 3 coaches even after splitting and so maybe this would be enough to match the capacity on this leg. Why couldn't 185s run to St Pancras? Are there no slow lines on the Midland mainline?

 

[43096]

Why couldn't 185s run to St Pancras? Are there no slow lines on the Midland mainline?

Why would you when there’s already two trains per hour from Sheffield, Derby and Nottingham to London and four trains per hour from Leicester. It’s utterly pointless even before you look at line capacity.

 

[The Planner]

. Why couldn't 185s run to St Pancras? Are there no slow lines on the Midland mainline?

Not for the 27 odd miles between Leicester and Kettering, no.

 

[gerryuk]

Split the train at Sheffield, one portion going to Norwich via Nottingham and the other non stop to Derby then a stopping service to to Bedford / Luton via Leicester, seems sensible to me if there are paths available?. No need to go as far as London.

 

[johnnychips]

Split the train at Sheffield, one portion going to Norwich via Nottingham and the other non stop to Derby then a stopping service to to Bedford / Luton via Leicester, seems sensible to me if there are paths available?. No need to go as far as London.

If you did this, the two trains would have to follow each other out of Sheffield to somewhere just beyond Chesterfield, the ones in the opposite direction likewise. There is no capacity for one to leave northward via Woodhouse, and it’s much slower anyway. As @43096 has almost pointed out, there are three trains an hour from Sheffield to Derby anyway, so adding capacity is pointless there, while reducing capacity from Sheffield to Nottingham. And I don’t think the volume of Manchester to Derby passengers is very significant.

 

[BeijingDave]

But would provide a link between Manchester and these cities without the need to change.

EDIT: I would suggest one of the two St Pancras Leicester Sheffield trains each hour be extended to Manchester using the extra hourly path in the Hope Valley upgrade spec. to provide such a link but of course there will not be sufficient trains in the new MML fleet to enable this.

Excuse me because I am not as knowledgeable as some on here and also don't work in the industry. However, I don't understand what possible rationale could exist for this.

Firstly, no frequent London-Manchester (and vice versa) traveller would ever choose the MML over the WCML unless the MML could offer a faster service or significantly cheaper price (both unlikely). Secondly, by having longer distance services you are increasing the likelihood of delays from one end point to another.

I could understand it if there were sizeable centres of population between Manchester and Sheffield that need a London connection but there simply aren't.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Apr 2022 ==

Split the train at Sheffield, one portion going to Norwich via Nottingham and the other non stop to Derby then a stopping service to to Bedford / Luton via Leicester, seems sensible to me if there are paths available?. No need to go as far as London.

Split trains should only be implemented if absolutely unavoidable because a sizeable minority of the public never listened to or understood basic instructions such as 'travel in the front 4 coaches to go to _________; travel in the rear 4 to go to ___________'

 

[Cheshire Scot]

Excuse me because I am not as knowledgeable as some on here and also don't work in the industry. However, I don't understand what possible rationale could exist for this.

Firstly, no frequent London-Manchester (and vice versa) traveller would ever choose the MML over the WCML unless the MML could offer a faster service or significantly cheaper price (both unlikely). Secondly, by having longer distance services you are increasing the likelihood of delays from one end point to another.

I could understand it if there were sizeable centres of population between Manchester and Sheffield that need a London connection but there simply aren't.

The original suggestion was to provide a link between Leicester / Derby and Manchester, absolutely no thoughts of it being for London to Manchester passengers, just a means of providing the missing link from cities in the East Mids to the North West, which at present is only possible from Nottingham, without providing an extra train between Sheffield and Leicester - but it is academic anyway, as noted above the new MML fleet would not have enough sets to include this . You do make a good point about potential delays.

 

[dk1]

The thought of more portion working & attaching/detaching at Sheffield & all the delay possibilities that go with it will send shivers down the spine of any railway controllers.

 

[liamf656]

The thought of more portion working & attaching/detaching at Sheffield & all the delay possibilities that go with it will send shivers down the spine of any railway controllers.

I agree. Portion working should be avoided as much as possible.

The Liverpool route is very sensitive and a 10 minute delay leaving Liverpool would end up as a 35 minute delay by Manchester if the path gets lost. And what would happen if just one portion (A) was delayed? Would the other portion (B) wait for it to arrive and attach and suffer a domino effect of delays, or would it leave portion A behind to prevent any delay, and thus end up with a short form?

 

[zwk500]

The thought of more portion working & attaching/detaching at Sheffield & all the delay possibilities that go with it will send shivers down the spine of any railway controllers.

Not just controllers! It'll be hard enough to make it work on paper, let alone getting anywhere near a controller.

 

[2192]

Post #16 said "Portion working should be avoided as much as possible"

I agree, but the Southern Region used to split trains successfully at Woking every half hour with one half going all stations to Portsmouth, and the other half to Alton, presumably to save paths between Waterloo and Woking. How often did this give problems?

 

[zwk500]

Post #16 said "Portion working should be avoided as much as possible"

I agree, but the Southern Region used to split trains successfully at Woking every half hour with one half going all stations to Portsmouth, and the other half to Alton, presumably to save paths between Waterloo and Woking. How often did this give problems?

It may have worked then, but that's very different to the conditions of today. The fact it's no longer operating should give some clues. Do the Brighton line coastways still split, I was led to believe they'd been removed as well?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Do the Brighton line coastways still split, I was led to believe they'd been removed as well?

Some late evening services out of London Victoria still split at Haywards Heath. One portion then works via the West Coastway to Worthing or maybe Bognor Regis, the other portion on the East Coastway operating to Eastbourne or sometimes Hastings.

 

[dk1]

Not just controllers! It'll be hard enough to make it work on paper, let alone getting anywhere near a controller.

So very true. It’s an idea that seems great whilst drunk in the pub but next morning when you sober up… lol

 

[30907]

Post #16 said "Portion working should be avoided as much as possible"

I agree, but the Southern Region used to split trains successfully at Woking every half hour with one half going all stations to Portsmouth, and the other half to Alton, presumably to save paths between Waterloo and Woking. How often did this give problems?

Alton is about 30min from Woking on a branch line, Basingstoke about the same on the otherwise quiet Slow lines. It worked - as did splits at Faversham and Swanley, on equally quiet routes, or at Horsham etc today. The Haywards Heath split was a bright idea but in practice....
And splitting at Sheffield, or even Nottingham, on much longer routes, is riskier.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Apparently according to Today's Railways, all 26 Class 158's are being retained because of fewer 170's transferring.

Personally, 170's would be better to and from Nottingham and Liverpool given 2/3 door layout and the usage of services in and out of Manchester.

I guess their should be enough 170's to run as 5 coaches!

 

[BeijingDave]

Alton is about 30min from Woking on a branch line, Basingstoke about the same on the otherwise quiet Slow lines. It worked - as did splits at Faversham and Swanley, on equally quiet routes, or at Horsham etc today. The Haywards Heath split was a bright idea but in practice....
And splitting at Sheffield, or even Nottingham, on much longer routes, is riskier.

Yes, much easier to double back and correct your mistake on the Southern, than it was for example, if you were daft enough to find yourself heading for Edinburgh on the wrong portion out of Carstairs when you needed to get to Motherwell.