How could unsatisfactory branch shuttles be improved?

[QueensCurve]

Helsby - Ellesmere Port.

Not sure what could be done with it. It's effectively a parliamentary service. Only 18 passengers used Ince & Elton in 2021.

On the face of it the passenger count doesn't justify electrification from Ellsmere Port. Perhaps there would be very much greater demand if it were given a full electric Merseyrail service?

St Albans Abbey. Non-memorable timetable due to length of the route and time taken for a return trip.

A very simple piece of railway that seems to suffer far more than its fair share of disruption.

I would add Oxenholm to Windermere - a branch whose electrification has been authorised and then cancelled twice.

 

[davetheguard]

What would provide a big improvement locally would be reversing at Twyford and running through to Reading. Probably not possible now with Crossrail coming, but that would be a big improvement in usabliity. Currently there can be long waits at Twyford and Reading is a much more useful destination.

A direct, hourly, through train Henley to Reading has been done in the past. But even then, it was only off peak, as the reversal in the Up Relief platform at Twyford eats into the line's capacity. I can't see that it could be accommodated on the main line these days. It also means the branch line can only run hourly, so not running through to Reading can lead to a more frequent service on the branch itself.

The noisy diesel trains on the Exmouth - Paignton shuttle make this service very unsatisfactory. Vibration from the motors under each carriage make every journey something to be endured rather than enjoyed

Well, "noise from the engines" applies to just about every diesel multiple unit in the country! Personally, I find the half hourly service between Exmouth & Paignton extremely useful; an excellent way of reaching Exeter city centre and avoiding its appalling traffic.

 

[seagull]

Totally agree with this. They should be turned around and send straight back out again!

On the 20 minute interval they already are: an allowance of 4 minutes only at each end for the driver to shut the cab down, walk the length of the train and open the leading cab up, carrying out the brief safety checks. Couldn't really reliably be done in less than this I would think.

Why the interval goes to 40 minutes alternately though I don't know, that does seem a little odd.

 

[norbitonflyer]

Can I nominate the Lincoln/Newark Northgate shuttle?
a small number of intermediate stops (usually non-stop - the Nottingham service handles the three intermediate stations)
, and also require few/no through services (until recently just one through service a night)
, likely to be only part of most journeys rather than the whole thing, (mainly used for connections to/from London - any passengers for Newark itself prefer the Nottingham services as Castle station is better located for the town centre and also has a more regular service)
, and a short distance (17 miles?)

Unloved and frequently ignored both by EMR and LNER (and their various predecessors) none of whom were good at holding connections. There is of course no incentive on a TOC to hold a connection, as it is the operator of the incoming service who will have to shell out on Delay Repay. Even when both EMT and LNER were subsidiaries of Stagecoach, they still behaved like competitors rather than partners.

As Stagecoach was the predominant bus operator in the area, their bus services on the Lincoln/Newark route (never very good) disappeared altogether during the period Stagecoach had the EMT franchise.

The number of shuttles were reduced when LNER's regular 0.5tph service from Kings Cross to Lincoln appeared in the timetable in 2019. Unfortunately, these are the first to go when LNER is short of staff (perhaps understandably, as the service is a fairly inefficient user of staff and rolling stock with layovers of 90 minutes at Lincoln, and only one station loses out by the cancellation).

 

[30907]

On the 20 minute interval they already are: an allowance of 4 minutes only at each end for the driver to shut the cab down, walk the length of the train and open the leading cab up, carrying out the brief safety checks. Couldn't really reliably be done in less than this I would think.

Why the interval goes to 40 minutes alternately though I don't know, that does seem a little odd.

It's a post-lockdown innovation.

 

[nw1]

Haha yes along with Birmingham-Euston too. Those platform signs lasted for years after at Colchester.

I wonder if (in the case of Birmingham-Euston) they were actually shuttles, or whether they interworked with anything else at Euston?

 

[ChrisC]

The noisy diesel trains on the Exmouth - Paignton shuttle make this service very unsatisfactory. Vibration from the motors under each carriage make every journey something to be endured rather than enjoyed

When I was recently visiting Exeter for a few days I was rather impressed at how good and efficient the half hourly train service was between Exeter and Exmouth. I found it hard to believe that this line had such a frequent service of often 4 carriage trains when up in the East Midlands and Yorkshire we regularly have overcrowded 2 carriage trains running between major cities.

 

[dk1]

I wonder if (in the case of Birmingham-Euston) they were actually shuttles, or whether they interworked with anything else at Euston?

It was just the name for particular short/frequent IC routes although wasn’t it predominantly mark 2s on a lot of EBW services?

 

[nw1]

It was just the name for particular short/frequent IC routes although wasn’t it predominantly mark 2s on a lot of EBW services?

Yes, I realised this - was just wondering whether they were actually a shuttle in the literal meaning of the word, i.e. stock which shuttled between two points for much of the day.

 

[dk1]

Yes, I realised this - was just wondering whether they were actually a shuttle in the literal meaning of the word, i.e. stock which shuttled between two points for much of the day.

Not sure really. No doubt step-ups occurred at times of disruption.

 

[GordonT]

When I was recently visiting Exeter for a few days I was rather impressed at how good and efficient the half hourly train service was between Exeter and Exmouth. I found it hard to believe that this line had such a frequent service of often 4 carriage trains when up in the East Midlands and Yorkshire we regularly have overcrowded 2 carriage trains running between major cities.

Perhaps the tradition of Western Region passengers leading a charmed life still persists. ("Sir, we do not blow whistles at people from Newbury".)

 

[takno]

A direct, hourly, through train Henley to Reading has been done in the past. But even then, it was only off peak, as the reversal in the Up Relief platform at Twyford eats into the line's capacity. I can't see that it could be accommodated on the main line these days. It also means the branch line can only run hourly, so not running through to Reading can lead to a more frequent service on the branch itself.

As I recall it meant a terrible service from Henley to Twyford, and it stopped in a really odd little bay at Reading which was no more convenient for connections than just changing at Twyford. Worst of all it meant that my mate's parents used to give me a lift to Henley Station instead of Reading. Being driven straight up to the car park entrance at Reading beats the Henley shuttle every time!

 

[Phil56]

The station is 5 minutes walk from Morrisons, 5 minutes walk from the Festival Market, 5 minutes walk from the front down Northumberland Street, 5 minutes walk from the Arndale. It will be close enough to Eden Project if that happens. Morecambe is quite a sprawling place so its impossible for any station to be close to every possible point of interest but I don't get the criticism of the station location.


Depends where your doors are I guess. As it stands the train is both quicker and cheaper for the straight forward Morecambe to Lancaster. Where the bus wins is with frequency (except today when there was no service).

Relatively few people live near the station so it’s of limited use for commuters and people travelling out of Morecambe. Not sure the Arndale would attract people from outside Morecambe?

Bare Lane is a lot busier as it’s surrounded by housing. Stations at West End and Heysham on the Heysham branch would be far more useful and attract more locals to start their journeys by train.

As for Eden, surely the problem of WCML paths will limit the potential, not to mention the short platforms that will limit train length?

 

[satisnek]

I haven't used it since the line was supposedly completely re-laid. Doesn't sound as though that has improved things, possibly the reverse.

It may not have improved things. When I popped up to Stourbridge back in November the vehicle didn't exactly glide along smoothly. Perhaps it's a transmission problem and the other one is OK? But it would have previously gone unnoticed when crashing over rail joints.

But I would say that it's unsatisfactory because apart from replacing the ancient track and provision of the cheapest possible trains the route hasn't had any money spent on it for decades. And if you discount the little brick building at the Town end, it probably hasn't had any money spent on it since it was built! In my opinion it has the potential to be a showpiece cutting-edge rapid transit system even with quite modest investment.

 

[takno]

It may not have improved things. When I popped up to Stourbridge back in November the vehicle didn't exactly glide along smoothly. Perhaps it's a transmission problem and the other one is OK? But it would have previously gone unnoticed when crashing over rail joints.

But I would say that it's unsatisfactory because apart from replacing the ancient track and provision of the cheapest possible trains the route hasn't had any money spent on it for decades. And if you discount the little brick building at the Town end, it probably hasn't had any money spent on it since it was built! In my opinion it has the potential to be a showcase cutting-edge rapid transit system even with quite modest investment.

The vehicles are grim. It's like a stunningly bad bus - overstaffed, too small, vibrates your bones out, not nearly enough seats. Being regular isn't much use when two of them can leave full before you get on it at school closing time. Basically it was less wretched as a mk 1 bubble car, but the best thing to do would probably be to tarmac over it and run an electric bus up and down

 

[janb]

Not sure the Arndale would attract people from outside Morecambe?

Arndale was just short hand for town centre. A lot of people that come in are looking for the Travelodge for instance.

I take your point about those wishing to leave (although for those that drive free parking is available), my impression was commuter traffic has been damaged by lack of reliability more than location, thus my thoughts on location were more about those coming in.

 

[Dr Hoo]

But I would say that it's unsatisfactory because apart from replacing the ancient track and provision of the cheapest possible trains the route hasn't had any money spent on it for decades. And if you discount the little brick building at the Town end, it probably hasn't had any money spent on it since it was built! In my opinion it has the potential to be a showpiece cutting-edge rapid transit system even with quite modest investment.

This is a bit like the 'What did the Romans ever do for us?' rhetorical question.

So the Stourbridge Town branch has had a new station, new trains and new track but "hasn't had any money spent on it for decades". Yeah; right.

However, the good news is that "it has the potential to be a showpiece cutting-edge rapid transit system even with quite modest investment". Super! What did you have in mind?

 

[AlastairFraser]

I'm probably biased, but I do feel the Henley branch could be better. It's lost the morning/evening direct trains to London completely now, missed out on electrification and right (post covid) now the timetable is only hourly. What would provide a big improvement locally would be reversing at Twyford and running through to Reading. Probably not possible now with Crossrail coming, but that would be a big improvement in usabliity. Currently there can be long waits at Twyford and Reading is a much more useful destination.

The best thing to do with the Henley branch would be to stick up tram wire and redouble track it with new stations off Mill Lane behind Tescos with a Park and Ride (as a Henley man/woman, you'll know how difficult parking is and the horrid congestion in general in Henley Town Centre) and on Bath Rd by Carlisles Corner Roundabout on the A4/A321 outside Twyford to serve Piggotts and the north end of Twyford.

With a few trams and light maintenance done in the platforms at Twyford Station (the second platform could easily be reopened), the service frequency could be increased to every 15 mins with minimal impact on operating expense to better connect with services towards Reading and London, the direct London trains aren't coming back as the GWML is rammed.
It would require significant initial investment, though there would be significant new income from Park and Ride passengers (especially during Regatta). The journey time would remain roughly the same, even with new stations as the faster acceleration of the trams would make up the time, plus the speed limit could be raised over the Wargrave Railway Bridge as the trams would be much lighter.

 

[randyrippley]

Perhaps Morecambe would be better served by a clock face 30 min shuttle to/from Lancaster and don’t worry about trying to connect with the mainline?

The problem is the branch shuttles getting in the way of the main line and blocking the north end of the through platforms as they enter/leave Lancaster
To make best use of the line it needs several extra stations so it can really be a shuttle: Broadway, York Bridge, West End Rd bridge, Regent Rd bridge, Moneyclose Lane. Electrify to Morecambe, battery from there to Heysham
Anyone know of any spare EMUs with room for a battery?
We can't have diesels taking people to Eden North

 

[zwk500]

The problem is the branch shuttles getting in the way of the main line and blocking the north end of the through platforms as they enter/leave Lancaster
To make best use of the line it needs several extra stations so it can really be a shuttle: Broadway, York Bridge, West End Rd bridge, Regent Rd bridge, Moneyclose Lane. Electrify to Morecambe, battery from there to Heysham
Anyone know of any spare EMUs with room for a battery?
We can't have diesels taking people to Eden North

With stops that frequent, some Class 777s would seem your best bet!

 

[satisnek]

This is a bit like the 'What did the Romans ever do for us?' rhetorical question.

So the Stourbridge Town branch has had a new station, new trains and new track but "hasn't had any money spent on it for decades". Yeah; right.

However, the good news is that "it has the potential to be a showpiece cutting-edge rapid transit system even with quite modest investment". Super! What did you have in mind?

Erm, well electric for a start. Automatic operation, with a single member of staff on the train. The technology has been around for ages and implementing it on one single line less than a mile in length isn't going to break the bank. But being a short, self-contained line in the West Midlands it has the potential to be a test bed for something much more advanced (but we're entering 'Speculative Ideas' territory here).

Yes, the track renewal is long overdue investment, but as for a small building constructed out of necessity because the line was cut back and the cheapest possible replacement rolling stock, well, OK, I'll rephrase what I said... The route has had a minimum amount of money spent on it since it was built.

 

[London Trains]

Erm, well electric for a start. Automatic operation, with a single member of staff on the train. The technology has been around for ages and implementing it on one single line less than a mile in length isn't going to break the bank. But being a short, self-contained line in the West Midlands it has the potential to be a test bed for something much more advanced (but we're entering 'Speculative Ideas' territory here).

I'd just convert it into a tram line and run it with a single Midland Metro tram, and then it could be incorporated to any future projects if Midland Metro reaches Stourbridge. This would mean its electric and would only need one member of staff, and the tram would have a much higher capacity than the current vehicles used.

 

[Dave W]

I'd just convert it into a tram line and run it with a single Midland Metro tram, and then it could be incorporated to any future projects if Midland Metro reaches Stourbridge. This would mean its electric and would only need one member of staff, and the tram would have a much higher capacity than the current vehicles used.

I’m generally against talk of ripping out the town branch, on account of it being my (childhood) local, but there was some vague discussion about this on the Metro extension thread. There once existed a triangular junction here, rebuilding the missing side would allow you to extend the Metro down the Round Oak line and on to Stour... one for the Speculative Ideas section, sorry.

I think there’s a lot of factors at play in terms of ride quality including load and driving style. The 360 view is nice though

 

[AlbertBeale]

People on here really don't like terminating anything short of where it could end up (e.g. the thread about extending Glasgow - Manchester to Birmingham, but then you can't terminate things at busy old New Street so you might as well extend it through to Bristol, but then why not go the whole hog and make it Penzance... actually, it could start further north of Glasgow, maybe Inverness... no, I know, Thurso, let's start it at Thurso...) - they hate the idea of buffer stops - even if it means knocking down half of central Bradford!

Yet, when it comes to bus services, a lot of people on here love the idea of terminating bus routes at some suburban roundabout so that people are forced to change to a tram (it's apparently fine for buses to terminate in the middle of nowhere and people be forced to change, but bad if rail passengers have to change anywhere...

I share some of the frustrations with branches - they can be inefficient uses of resources, they can require non-standard stock (e.g. a diesel branch in an electrified region, the 139s for Stourbridge, the hassle in getting trains between a branch with a PVR of one and a distant depot) and therefore something to try to avoid/simplify - but that said, I can see why it might be better to have a short unit doing the shuttle than either running twelve coach trains from the main line to the branch or running short trains from the branch onto the main line... tricky

The three problems with a shuttle (as I see it) are:

1. Does it terminate at a useful destination in its own right, or at somewhere that's only really a junction?
2. Could/ Should/ Would the frequency be any better if it was a through service/ would it be better to have a reduced frequency on the branch if they were through trains?
3. Is there scope for through trains on the main line?

In the case of Cornwall, I'd suggest that Par is a pretty rubbish place to terminate Newquay services (it's not much of a destination in its own right, compared to the Falmouth branch which terminates in the regional centre of Truro) and that there's nothing stopping an increased frequency on the Newquay branch with just one unit (whereas the Falmouth branch is pretty much at capacity) and there's nothing stopping through trains from Newquay to Plymouth on a more regular basis

For the Thames Valley branches, they look fine as they are, pretty much operating at line capacity, you wouldn't want to run short DMUs through to Paddington and there aren't any spare paths at Paddington so any Marlow/ Henley/ Windsor services would have to be at the expense of an existing Reading - Paddington service, so I wouldn't change them

South east London I know less about. I can see why the Bromley shuttle annoys a number of enthusiasts, it's short, it feels incomplete, especially with various other "incomplete" bits of line nearby (the Hayes branch takes up four paths per hour at busy London termini, Tramlink and the DLR aren't far away, you could waste a lot of crayon on coming up with something that ties all of these frustrating "stubs" together. Instinctively I can see it's "troublesome" to use heavy rail paths from central London on fairly short routes like Hayes or the Sutton/Wimbledon loop since there's an opportunity cost to these paths (and they could be used for longer distance/ longer trains) but it's not a hard and fast rule

But what would it achieve if Bromley - Grove Park was a through tram from Croydon or DLR to Canary Wharf, if the main demand would still be for connections into London Bridge etc? If the branch is running as frequently as it can (or wouldn't see any significant increase in frequency if it was trams/ DLR) then what's the advantage for most passengers? You could have a Bromley North - Bromley South extension but how many links does that provide (that aren't already available from the different ways of getting from the Orpington and Swanley lines to the Bromley South/ Grove Park lines)? Bromley North already seems close enough to the main shopping area, but would you be putting an intermediate station between there and Bromley South if you had a tram/DLR linking both sides of Bromley (the two existing stations are less than 1km apart)? I dunno, it feels like a lot of effort (and money) for the sake of very few genuine benefits, other than appealing to members of the BufferStopPhobic community



Agreed - it'd be much better with a dedicated unit, rather than hamstrung with an awkward timetable because the railway is still catering to the days of wealth Victorian Mill owners travelling from West Yorkshire to "Bradford-On-Sea"

PVR??

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

It's a very useful link between the lines into Essex from Liverpool Street and Fenchurch Street. Usage has increased in recent years, partly due to people using it to get to Lakeside Shopping Centre, changing at Upminster for Chafford Hundred. I often use it to travel from Upminster towards Chelmsford & Colchester. It's also a useful alternative route into London from Upminster, which I will be using today as C2C are only running as far as Barking. I suspect that when Crossrail fully opens more people will use it to access this from Upminster.

It would be even more useful if it still ran through to Grays but that was severed by the District Line a long time ago. The line was one of only a few to be twice reprieved from closure in the 1960s & early 70s after a strong local campaign which my father was heavily involved in. Electrification couldn't see foreseen then but now under TFL we have longer operating hours and a Sunday service.

It's a shame that neither a 20 minute service or extra halts, both of which have been considered, have been introduced. There was (and still is) a good case for a halt to serve Havering Sixth Form College.

c2c should run it with a single 357. It’s confusing under London Overground, with no connection whatsoever to other Overground lines. It must cause some confusion when someone looks at an Overground map and no explanation is there on how to actually get to either Romford or Upminster.

Yes, this will cease to be a branch shuttle from the 2023.
It's one with pretty decent service already though with five services each hour to Queen Street.

It will eventually have six hourly services with 2 each to Treherbert, Aberdare and Merthyr.

No no no… ha I wish! Since COVID it’s been an extremely unreliable (single track both sides of Queen St always cause delays and it’s first to be cut in staff shortages) two per hour service between Bay and Coryton. Five per hour seems like a distant dream now.

 

[PG]

PVR??

I could well be in need of correcting but I think that stands for:
Peak Vehicle Requirement

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The problem is the branch shuttles getting in the way of the main line and blocking the north end of the through platforms as they enter/leave Lancaster

Yes, I assumed conflicting moves is the main reason the timetable on the Morecambe branch is so irregular. Lancaster-bound trains have to cross the WCML when they join it and then again to get to platforms 1/2 at Lancaster, so lots of potential for conflicts.

I wonder if you could partially solve it by building the long-proposed Lancaster University station, extend the Morecambe shuttle there, and design the station so the shuttle terminates in between the main WCML tracks? (Although yes, I realise that might cause new pathing issues fitting in the trains South of Lancaster, even as it solves the conflicting moves at Lancaster station).

More cheaply, if you didn't want to build the new station: Would there be any possibility of reworking Lancaster so that platform 5 becomes the main Southbound platform, with the Morecambe shuttle usually terminating at Platform 4?

Extending the shuttle at the other end - to Morecambe West End would also make it a bit more useful (although still could do with a regular timetable). I'm guessing extending there wouldn't require a massive amount of infrastructure: A single-platform station, and you'd probably need to resignal/do track works at Morecambe so that the line becomes a conventional double track line between Morecambe and Bare Lane.

 

[142blue]

Yes, I assumed conflicting moves is the main reason the timetable on the Morecambe branch is so irregular. Lancaster-bound trains have to cross the WCML when they join it and then again to get to platforms 1/2 at Lancaster, so lots of potential for conflicts.

I wonder if you could partially solve it by building the long-proposed Lancaster University station, extend the Morecambe shuttle there, and design the station so the shuttle terminates in between the main WCML tracks? (Although yes, I realise that might cause new pathing issues fitting in the trains South of Lancaster, even as it solves the conflicting moves at Lancaster station).

More cheaply, if you didn't want to build the new station: Would there be any possibility of reworking Lancaster so that platform 5 becomes the main Southbound platform, with the Morecambe shuttle usually terminating at Platform 4?

Extending the shuttle at the other end - to Morecambe West End would also make it a bit more useful (although still could do with a regular timetable). I'm guessing extending there wouldn't require a massive amount of infrastructure: A single-platform station, and you'd probably need to resignal/do track works at Morecambe so that the line becomes a conventional double track line between Morecambe and Bare Lane.

If you are building stations I'd propose University, Galgate, Garstang Parkway and Broughton as a minimum

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Jan 2022 ==

No mention of the Whitby branch. One place I'd never take the train to when you can drive from Manchester in under three hours

 

[takno]

No mention of the Whitby branch. One place I'd never take the train to when you can drive from Manchester in under three hours

I'm struggling to think of any reason why I'd ever be in a rush to get to Whitby tbh.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Blackpool South. Fir the areas it serves its rotten and needs double tracking or loops at least

I agree. Loops initially. Then electrify. If massive increase double track in places.