Ideas for York - Leeds - Manchester improvements

[Manutd1999]

Really depends what timetable you want to run eastwards of Leeds. What is a realistic scenario? 6 fast NPR trains to York? 2 fast to Hull? And 2 stoppers each to York and Selby? 12 trains an hour plus those going to Neville Hill should be easy on two tracks; even a couple more, for instance one train to London.

The IRP outlined a plan to electrify Bradford Interchange - Leeds in the early 2030a. Perhaps there is a long-term ambition to run the Leeds to York stoppers from Bradford? Or maybe I am giving the IRP far too much credit....

 

[30907]

The IRP outlined a plan to electrify Bradford Interchange - Leeds in the early 2030a. Perhaps there is a long-term ambition to run the Leeds to York stoppers from Bradford? Or maybe I am giving the IRP far too much credit....

Certainly Bradford to York is an obvious route, and historically both stoppers east of Leeds did just that, not just the Selby route.

 

[YorksLad12]

I can see there being some value in having an hourly or bi-hourly extension of Huddersfield - Castleford to York, but it would probably be slower than going via Leeds. Rather than looking for a reason to avoid Leeds, we should maybe look at what such a move would actually gain. I can see the potential of linking depressed Castleford with prosperous York, and a slower but reliable alternative for Huddersfield to York in the event of disruption would be useful... however occasional use-cases don't really build a business-case.

In any case, we need to get the ordinary Castleford service back before we can start to experiment with extensions and the like.

(I was going to quote all the elements making up my reply, but that would be half a page in itself )

Huddersfield-York via Wakefield and Castleford would, indeed be slower - but that just the terminating points. Thnk of it as combining a Huddersfield-Castleford and Wakefield-York service and it makes slightly more sense. Whether you could (or would) do this by extedning the Manchester-Huddersfield stopper I'll leave as an exercise for the reader... but the idea of an 802 calling at Normanton or Sherburn makes me giggle. Pretty sure that Ravensthorpe-Castleford-Church Fenton electrification is not in scope

I don't think any of the fast TPE services should be routed away from Leeds; it's the faster route than via Wakefield would be, just as not going via Leeds is faster for CrossCountry. Plus the passengers flows are Manchester-Leeds and Leeds-York.

I think I've suggested before using P12 & 15 for TPE (CrossCountry generally use 8, 9 & 11) but they were using 12, 15 & 16 before the pandemic when it was 5 tph. If they could be made to fit on the 12 & 15 island then P16 could be used for the stoppers in either direction, which could then be longer trains - though that does block a through line. Not for long though, if you time it right.

 

[matacaster]

The IRP outlined a plan to electrify Bradford Interchange - Leeds in the early 2030a. Perhaps there is a long-term ambition to run the Leeds to York stoppers from Bradford? Or maybe I am giving the IRP far too much credit....

They could do that earlier by running from forster sq rather than wait for interchange to leeds electrification.

 

[Manutd1999]

They could do that earlier by running from forster sq rather than wait for interchange to leeds electrification.

You could do, but there are also some benefits to keeping the Forster Square/Skipton/Ilkley services self-contained in the low-numbered bay platforms.

Running more stoppers from Interchange would also allow select services to skip Pudsey and Bramley, imporving journey times for the Calder Valley.

 

[LittleAH]

The key way to improve Manchester-Leeds-York/Hull services via Standedge is for none of them to be routed via the Castlefield line.

• The fast services (2 tph) should be routed via Victoria to Liverpool and only call at Huddersfield in addition to Manchester/Leeds between Liverpool and York. They should extend alternately to Newcastle/Tees-side, and be run by the ECML franchise, with first-class provision and catering.
• Semi-fast services (2 tph) should call at Dewsbury/Huddersfield/Stalybridge/Guide Bridge between Leeds and Manchester and terminate at Manchester Piccadilly platforms 1-3. They should be run by Northern.
• Stopping services via Standedge should be run by Northern using 3-4 carriage trains and in Manchester terminate at Victoria platforms 1-2.

This completely fails to take into account the capacity constraints at the Manchester stations. Never mind that there will be no abolishing of any operators under GBR

 

[MisterSheeps]

I'd be massively shocked if there was enough traffic for 2tph avoiding Leeds

Pre covid i was returning from a conference in Leeds, going to Manchester. The 2 x 3 coach Newcastle - Liverpool was full & standing when it pulled into Leeds around 17:30, most of whom remained on it. Maybe unrepresentational & not recent, admittedly. But laying a few limited stoppers via Castleford to test the market should not make too much of a dent in the billion

 

[daodao]

This completely fails to take into account the capacity constraints at the Manchester stations. Never mind that there will be no abolishing of any operators under GBR.

Please explain why. I would argue on the contrary that it does do so, and also relieves pressure on the Castlefield line. I am not proposing services into platforms 1-3 at Piccadilly or 3-4 at Victoria in excess of those currently being operated. Platforms 1-2 at Victoria are currently underutilised, with just 1 tph (from Leeds via Rochdale) using platform 1; this service should really be joined with a service to the west, e.g. to Southport/Wigan, and run via platforms 5/6 to keep the ex-LNW and ex-LY services as separate as possible at Victoria.

I accept that the abominable TPE franchise may not be abolished, although I think that train operations in the north of England could be simplified and improved if TPE's services were partitioned amongst other franchises.

 

[Neptune]

I accept that the abominable TPE franchise may not be abolished, although I think that train operations in the north of England could be simplified and improved if TPE's services were partitioned amongst other franchises.

I have always argued that all of TPE should have been merged back with Northern in 2016 when they were re-let on the same day under the auspices of TfN.

This was shot down with utterances such as ‘we don’t want 150’s on TPE services etc…. Of course if the crews from the merged company didn’t cross over (ie. TPE crews didn’t sign Northern stock and vice versa) then this would minimise this potential ‘issue’.

You could have kept TPE as a sub-brand of Northern with its distinctive livery and I’m sure Northern crews would prefer to wear the smart TPE style uniform rather than the horrific Arriva inspired insipid budget looking current Northern uniform (think GWR crews on this one, one smart uniform for all). The TPE star logo could have been used in place of the ‘n’ for the whole franchise too.

It was mainly the usual Northern haters not wanting their precious TPE services tarnished by Northern. Have a look at the two franchises today and see which one has the worst press for reliability of service!

The eastern side split of the Norwich - Liverpool route could have come under the Northern/TPE joint franchise too simplifying operators through Manchester. It won’t happen but in my opinion it should have in 2016.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Pre covid i was returning from a conference in Leeds, going to Manchester. The 2 x 3 coach Newcastle - Liverpool was full & standing when it pulled into Leeds around 17:30, most of whom remained on it. Maybe unrepresentational & not recent, admittedly. But laying a few limited stoppers via Castleford to test the market should not make too much of a dent in the billion

I'm supportive of the idea of "not everything needs to go to Leeds" for sure. But 2tph (as you suggested) isn't a starting point when even the established services run at 1tph.

 

[Bantamzen]

everyone is talking about squeezing more trains through Leeds, but has anyone done any traffic analysis to see if the north cross pennine flow supports enough passengers to avoid Leeds? i.e. resurrect service on the L & Y mainline : York - Castleford - Wakefield - Huddersfield, say 2 tph.

Given that Leeds is not just a destination, but a major hub for the area I'm not sure there is any merit in routing TPEs away from it. You'll probably find that most TPEs through Leeds see considerable churn of passengers, routing some away will simply put more pressure on the remaining services. Maybe there is a market, albeit very limited for stopping services from Huddersfield, through Castleford and onto York, but routing mainline services away is probably not a sound strategy.

 

[Neptune]

Given that Leeds is not just a destination, but a major hub for the area I'm not sure there is any merit in routing TPEs away from it. You'll probably find that most TPEs through Leeds see considerable churn of passengers, routing some away will simply put more pressure on the remaining services. Maybe there is a market, albeit very limited for stopping services from Huddersfield, through Castleford and onto York, but routing mainline services away is probably not a sound strategy.

Yes you never see people on here trying to find a way for TPE to avoid Manchester yet Leeds is always fair game it would seem.

I always feel that as usual on the forum because a line exists then it must be used by passenger services regardless of any implications. A bit like if a line used to be there it must be put back and it will definitely be busier than the south WCML.

Yes there are people who travel on TPE without getting on/off at Leeds but does anyone really think every one of these people would use the ‘Leeds avoider’ service when it would actually take longer? People book tickets from A to B and don’t care what route it takes.

The only merit I could see to using the line beyond Castleford would be maybe a 2 hourly max York - Leeds via Cas service to link Sherburn-in-Elmet directly with Leeds (the regional hub).

TPE has had the problem of trying to squeeze more and more services through the core. If it stuck to a clockface 4tph service across the core with the various upgrades to allow other services to slot around them then that would be a winning start.

 

[tbtc]

Yes you never see people on here trying to find a way for TPE to avoid Manchester yet Leeds is always fair game it would seem.

I always feel that as usual on the forum because a line exists then it must be used by passenger services regardless of any implications. A bit like if a line used to be there it must be put back and it will definitely be busier than the south WCML

Agreed, it’s a really strange idea that keeps cropping up, despite it not solving any particular problems

For a start, it’d take half an hour longer to do Huddersfield to York (Than going via the big city of Leeds), so it’d probably get overtaken by a couple of Huddersfield- Leeds- York trains (So it’s not even as if skipping the busiest station between Manchester and Newcastle saves any time)

For example, let’s say the Manchester - Middlesbrough service was chosen to go via Castleford; not only would Teesside lose direct trains to Leeds but there’d also be a thirty minute Time penalty

Then, you’d have to question what links you were creating to justify so this disruption… Huddersfield had an hourly service to Wakefield/ Castleford before Northern gave up on it, but it’s presumably due to come back at some stage… Wakefield has an hourly service to York (XC)… Wakefield was meant to be getting an extension of the Manchester - Huddersfield stoppers (no need to involve York to achieve this!)… so I can’t see any missing market that a “via Castleford” service would solve

IF you are desperate to run regular trains on every bit of line that’s currently unused, you’d be better extending some Sheffield - Barnsley - Castleford trains to York (given that Barnsley currently had no trains north of Leeds, so at least there’s a slim argument that giving Barnsley a direct train to York would offer something different)

Focus on longer trains for the existing TPE routes, four per hour on the “core” plus an hourly stopper each side of Huddersfield seems fine to me right now; focus on longer trains rather than disrupting passengers by taking them on a long diversion via Castleford

 

[Neptune]

Agreed, it’s a really strange idea that keeps cropping up, despite it not solving any particular problems

For a start, it’d take half an hour longer to do Huddersfield to York (Than going via the big city of Leeds), so it’d probably get overtaken by a couple of Huddersfield- Leeds- York trains (So it’s not even as if skipping the busiest station between Manchester and Newcastle saves any time)

For example, let’s say the Manchester - Middlesbrough service was chosen to go via Castleford; not only would Teesside lose direct trains to Leeds but there’d also be a thirty minute Time penalty

Then, you’d have to question what links you were creating to justify so this disruption… Huddersfield had an hourly service to Wakefield/ Castleford before Northern gave up on it, but it’s presumably due to come back at some stage… Wakefield has an hourly service to York (XC)… Wakefield was meant to be getting an extension of the Manchester - Huddersfield stoppers (no need to involve York to achieve this!)… so I can’t see any missing market that a “via Castleford” service would solve

IF you are desperate to run regular trains on every bit of line that’s currently unused, you’d be better extending some Sheffield - Barnsley - Castleford trains to York (given that Barnsley currently had no trains north of Leeds, so at least there’s a slim argument that giving Barnsley a direct train to York would offer something different)

Focus on longer trains for the existing TPE routes, four per hour on the “core” plus an hourly stopper each side of Huddersfield seems fine to me right now; focus on longer trains rather than disrupting passengers by taking them on a long diversion via Castleford

Agree completely. I’m sure those that suggest 1 of the hourly services avoiding Leeds would not suggest the ones that affect them due to the longer time.

Same as those that suggest terminating XC at Leeds without offering a solution of how the reduced capacity this would cause could be resolved. And you can tell it isn’t thought out as when questioned on how to resolve the issues it either ends up being something ridiculous like building a new viaduct for 10 extra platforms and stabling sidings or more commonly ends up with dummies spat out and fingers in ears because they don’t want to hear the issues any suggestion could cause because apparently realism is now known as ‘pessimism’.

As I said, you never get the same suggestions for avoiding Manchester. It’s like people are allergic to Leeds and want to avoid it by taking a service which takes longer.

 

[nr758123]

Huddersfield had an hourly service to Wakefield/ Castleford before Northern gave up on it, but it’s presumably due to come back at some stage… Wakefield has an hourly service to York (XC)… Wakefield was meant to be getting an extension of the Manchester - Huddersfield stoppers (no need to involve York to achieve this!)… so I can’t see any missing market that a “via Castleford” service would solve

The agenda of the (cancelled) Rail North Committee meeting today references extension of the Manchester-Huddersfield stopping service from May 2023. Whether this would be a replacement for Northern's Huddersfield-Castleford service is not stated.

4.17 Looking forward, TPE continues to make headway with its significant driver training programme and is recruiting additional driver trainees. With the May 2023 timetable change, TPE is looking to add additional York – Scarborough services for holiday traffic (Fridays and weekends / bank holidays), as well as extending its Manchester – Huddersfield service to York via Wakefield and Castleford.

 

[YorksLad12]

The agenda of the (cancelled) Rail North Committee meeting today references extension of the Manchester-Huddersfield stopping service from May 2023. Whether this would be a replacement for Northern's Huddersfield-Castleford service is not stated.

4.17 Looking forward, TPE continues to make headway with its significant driver training programme and is recruiting additional driver trainees. With the May 2023 timetable change, TPE is looking to add additional York – Scarborough services for holiday traffic (Fridays and weekends / bank holidays), as well as extending its Manchester – Huddersfield service to York via Wakefield and Castleford.

Well... knock me down with a feather.

TPE taking over Huddersfield-Wakefield makes sense during the TRU work (as they did for the Huddersfield-Leeds stopper) but the extension to York via Castleford is exactly what some people here have been calling for to test the market. We're assuming it'll call at Sherburn-in-Elmet and Church Fenton, (not Ulleskelf) I guess?

Better update my various maps, I guess

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I'd like to see York - Leeds sorted, presumably by building the Northern tip of HS2 first, from Church Fenton N Jn to a (fast) branch to Crossgates' proposed 4 tracks. It would need a truly heroic flyover over the M1. That still leaves Marsh Lane - Kirkgate - Leeds City as two track and both routes would need electrification. It could end main line Diesel operation North of Leeds.

WAO

I am somewhat out of touch with HS2 developments and on that matter, the last I heard was that the Yorkshire side of the projection northwards had been truncated from its original terminal point and the Western side was via Crewe. That being said, the mention of Church Fenton comes as a surprise to me.

Can someone update my knowledge on HS2 north of Birmingham, please, especially with regard to HS2 in the Church Fenton area.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Agreed, it’s a really strange idea that keeps cropping up, despite it not solving any particular problems

For a start, it’d take half an hour longer to do Huddersfield to York (Than going via the big city of Leeds), so it’d probably get overtaken by a couple of Huddersfield- Leeds- York trains (So it’s not even as if skipping the busiest station between Manchester and Newcastle saves any time)

For example, let’s say the Manchester - Middlesbrough service was chosen to go via Castleford; not only would Teesside lose direct trains to Leeds but there’d also be a thirty minute Time penalty

Then, you’d have to question what links you were creating to justify so this disruption… Huddersfield had an hourly service to Wakefield/ Castleford before Northern gave up on it, but it’s presumably due to come back at some stage… Wakefield has an hourly service to York (XC)… Wakefield was meant to be getting an extension of the Manchester - Huddersfield stoppers (no need to involve York to achieve this!)… so I can’t see any missing market that a “via Castleford” service would solve

IF you are desperate to run regular trains on every bit of line that’s currently unused, you’d be better extending some Sheffield - Barnsley - Castleford trains to York (given that Barnsley currently had no trains north of Leeds, so at least there’s a slim argument that giving Barnsley a direct train to York would offer something different)

Focus on longer trains for the existing TPE routes, four per hour on the “core” plus an hourly stopper each side of Huddersfield seems fine to me right now; focus on longer trains rather than disrupting passengers by taking them on a long diversion via Castleford

I don't think anyone (well, maybe one) is actually suggesting that we divert an existing service away from Leeds.

I'm under no illusion that such a service would suddenly become the premier route between Huddersfield and York, but I do think that it would do more than minibus numbers. Which is more than can be said for some of the stations getting opened or reopened in Scotland.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Sep 2022 ==

The agenda of the (cancelled) Rail North Committee meeting today references extension of the Manchester-Huddersfield stopping service from May 2023. Whether this would be a replacement for Northern's Huddersfield-Castleford service is not stated.

Well... knock me down with a feather.

TPE taking over Huddersfield-Wakefield makes sense during the TRU work (as they did for the Huddersfield-Leeds stopper) but the extension to York via Castleford is exactly what some people here have been calling for to test the market. We're assuming it'll call at Sherburn-in-Elmet and Church Fenton, (not Ulleskelf) I guess?

Better update my various maps, I guess

I was under the impression that the TPE to Wakefield Kirkgate idea was just a way of allowing 6-car formations on the Manchester stopper without blocking all of Huddersfield P4, and that intermediate stations (Deighton and Mirfield) would not be served.

If it would actually give Mirfield a second Huddersfield service, I'm very much in favour... particularly if they're better spaced than the old Northern Casvegas service was (as it ran 5mins behind the Leeds stopper it was neither use nor ornament from Mirfield!).

 

[YorksLad12]

I was assuming it would be a three-car set running additional mileage. Could you get a six-car unit at Castleford?

And absolutely agree with you on the Casvegas timings. Anyone have an old timetable to hand to work out what the timings would be, if a straight extension?

Edit: Bells have started ringing. I think in a previous thread, many moons ago, I might have said that this (at the time wholly speculative) service could take over the Dearne Valley line path between Sherburn and York. Could this also mean the end for what's left of the the Dearne Valley Line?

 

[Grumpy]

The big market is between Leeds (and points east of) and Manchester (and points west of). One simple means of improving the attractiveness of this would be to cut out some of the Huddersfield stops and shorten the end-to-end journey times by 5 mins or so.

 

[Neptune]

The big market is between Leeds (and points east of) and Manchester (and points west of). One simple means of improving the attractiveness of this would be to cut out some of the Huddersfield stops and shorten the end-to-end journey times by 5 mins or so.

Thereby cutting out a huge market for the sake of 5 minutes? Makes no sense.

 

[YorksLad12]

The big market is between Leeds (and points east of) and Manchester (and points west of). One simple means of improving the attractiveness of this would be to cut out some of the Huddersfield stops and shorten the end-to-end journey times by 5 mins or so.

Thereby cutting out a huge market for the sake of 5 minutes? Makes no sense.

Not only the market (and WYCA would never agree) but wouldn't the pathing go a bit wonky as well? We'll be trying to fit in 4 fasts, 2 semi-fasts and two stoppers; cutting Huddersfield out from, say, two of the fasts might mean they catch up with the services in front. Now, if there was some sort of tunnel near Marsden that ended up west of Stalybridge...

 

[LittleAH]

Please explain why. I would argue on the contrary that it does do so, and also relieves pressure on the Castlefield line. I am not proposing services into platforms 1-3 at Piccadilly or 3-4 at Victoria in excess of those currently being operated. Platforms 1-2 at Victoria are currently underutilised, with just 1 tph (from Leeds via Rochdale) using platform 1; this service should really be joined with a service to the west, e.g. to Southport/Wigan, and run via platforms 5/6 to keep the ex-LNW and ex-LY services as separate as possible at Victoria.

I accept that the abominable TPE franchise may not be abolished, although I think that train operations in the north of England could be simplified and improved if TPE's services were partitioned amongst other franchises.

Because what is suggested would mean 8tph between MCV - SYB. And it’s highly unlikely Northern will procure rolling stock with ETCS in the near future. All of that before a freight path is taken into consideration.

And merging of operators doesn’t mean simplifying anything. Unless GBR becomes BR. Which is unlikely.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I was assuming it would be a three-car set running additional mileage. Could you get a six-car unit at Castleford?

I don't think TPE are looking at running as far as Castleford, just Wakefield Kirkgate. In any case it wouldn't be 6-car all day, just the busier services.

Thereby cutting out a huge market for the sake of 5 minutes? Makes no sense.

I doubt you'd even save five minutes. The linespeed through Huddersfield for non-stopping trains isn't particularly high.

 

[Neptune]

Because what is suggested would mean 8tph between MCV - SYB. And it’s highly unlikely Northern will procure rolling stock with ETCS in the near future. All of that before a freight path is taken into consideration.

And merging of operators doesn’t mean simplifying anything. Unless GBR becomes BR. Which is unlikely.

Apart from the 195 and 331 fleet of course.

 

[daodao]

Because what is suggested would mean 8tph between MCV - SYB.

No. There would be a maximum of 6 tph between Stalybridge and Victoria:

• 2 tph fast trains NE-York-Leeds-Huddersfield-Victoria-Lime Street
• 2 tph stopping trains Huddersfield-Stalybridge-Victoria
• 2 tph stopping trains Stalybridge-Victoria, extended west e.g. to Bolton/Wigan NW

 

[Grumpy]

Thereby cutting out a huge market for the sake of 5 minutes? Makes no sense.

Leeds to Manchester (and beyond both) is the huge market which is being hindered by stopping at relatively small places such as Huddersfield and Dewsbury. I have lost track of what this project is planning to deliver but I recall a forecast spend of approx £10 billion to cut Manchester to York journey times by 8 minutes. You could probably achieve much of that for nothing by running some trains nonstop between Leeds and Manchester. Huddersfield might still have some semi-fast stops plus stoppers

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Leeds to Manchester (and beyond both) is the huge market which is being hindered by stopping at relatively small places such as Huddersfield and Dewsbury. I have lost track of what this project is planning to deliver but I recall a forecast spend of approx £10 billion to cut Manchester to York journey times by 8 minutes. You could probably achieve much of that for nothing by running some trains nonstop between Leeds and Manchester. Huddersfield might still have some semi-fast stops plus stoppers

How on earth can you think of describing Huddersfield as a "relatively small place"..

Its last stated population was over 146,000.

 

[Grumpy]

ces.

I doubt you'd even save five minutes. The linespeed through Huddersfield for non-stopping trains isn't particularly high.

Well perhaps they should spend some money on upping the line speed. Would be better than the current plans to squander millions on new platforms for hopelessly uneconomic services that only cater for a handful of passengers eg Bradford, Wakefield/Castleford

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Sep 2022 ==

How on earth can you think of describing Huddersfield as a "relatively small place"..

Its last stated population was over 146,000.

It is a small place relative to Leeds and Manchester. I didn't say it was tiny or insignificant.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Well perhaps they should spend some money on upping the line speed. Would be better than the current plans to squander millions on new platforms for hopelessly uneconomic services that only cater for a handful of passengers eg Bradford, Wakefield/Castleford

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Sep 2022 ==


It is a small place relative to Leeds and Manchester. I didn't say it was tiny or insignificant.

Good idea, let's spend the TPRU budget on trimming a few minutes off the overall journey for just two out of the six trains per hour, rather than increasing capacity. That wouldn't be squandering millions for marginal gains, would it?

The cognitive dissonance in your post is astounding. New platforms are a waste, but spending millions on a minor realignment to gain 5 minutes at the most wouldn't be?