Limited stop trains

[irish_rail]

Cut the stops out at Taunton and Tiverton Parkway and you're robbing large swathes of Somerset and Devon of their link with the rest of the country. Revenue will drop and your fares will go up as a result.

Would revenue drop though? Im not convinced , as with a decent faster XC service, more people from Plymouth and Exeter and their localities would take the train instead of driving or flying.

completely agree with the OP, that XC should provide some services, maybe 3 a day that are Plymouth, Exeter, Bristol, Birmingham.
Trouble would be is these trains would end up being too popular and become overcrowded I expect. GWR used to run the 1206 Padd to PZ fast Reading to Exeter, no coincidence it was the busiest train of the day!

 

[Starmill]

Would revenue drop though? Im not convinced , as with a decent faster XC service, more people from Plymouth and Exeter and their localities would take the train instead of driving or flying.

It's a question of price elasticaties of journey times. How much extra are people willing to get better journey times? There are lots of useful answers to this in academic research, and there is even a dedicated industry tool called Moira which models it. The answer will be easily available for a few £k.

 

[irish_rail]

Is this service viable without Reading though, is the point?

Is a Plymouth service viable without Totnes and Newton Abbot? Or Cornwall on the other side..? Not really - it's not a huge place in terms of rail usage. Population aside, it's a fairly remote/insular/self-sufficient economy there. 2m is not much. Compare it to Norwich, another big regional fish in a small pond, which is double the size. It's odd as Plymouth is not a Bradford or a Sunderland - overlooked by a more prosperous neighbour.

I may be misunderstanding your post but are you saying Norwich is bigger than Plymouth??? Plymouth is twice the population of Norwich and with the large catchment area of all of Cornwall to boot. Its also an important Military and University city. And on your point about being overlooked by a more prosperous neighbour, Plymouth gets VERY overlooked in favour of wealthier Exeter Trust me!

 

[Esker-pades]

No it doesn't, HS2 solves that. Both XC will go via Coventry in the future.

Just on that, how will the Leamington-Coventry line cope with the extra 2tph along the single track parts?

 

[Gareth]

And on your point about being overlooked by a more prosperous neighbour, Plymouth gets VERY overlooked in favour of wealthier Exeter Trust me!

Which is interesting because I've always thought a fairly reliable indicator of which city is favoured in any particular part of the country is where the BBC and regional ITV company traditionally used to base themselves - which in Devon & Cornwall's case is/was Plymouth.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Would revenue drop though? Im not convinced , as with a decent faster XC service, more people from Plymouth and Exeter and their localities would take the train instead of driving or flying.

Based on the (admittedly limited) observations posted upthread, Taunton was the single biggest source of traffic on a cross-country service between Plymouth and Cogload Junction, so I'd be reasonably confident that omitting that call would cost the railway revenue. That is, unless someone can provide evidence of hordes of people in Plymouth that choose to drive because the train is ten minutes too slow for them. I'm not convinced these people exist in significant numbers, apart from the OP.

 

[Shrop]

No it doesn't, HS2 solves that. Both XC will go via Coventry in the future.

I hope you're right, that HS2 solves the Coventry to New Street capacity issue. I wonder what the Birmingham to Euston service pattern via MK will be with fast and semi-fast services, once HS2 is open?

 

[The Planner]

Just on that, how will the Leamington-Coventry line cope with the extra 2tph along the single track parts?

Redoubled from Milverton to Kenilworth.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Dec 2021 ==

I hope you're right, that HS2 solves the Coventry to New Street capacity issue. I wonder what the Birmingham to Euston service pattern via MK will be with fast and semi-fast services, once HS2 is open?

What is the capacity problem anyway? Apart from the second XC via Coventry what else are you expecting down there and what are you doing with them at Proof House and New St? You will go to a half hourly pattern post HS2, which is easier to deal with than a 20 minute one.

 

[Shrop]

Based on the (admittedly limited) observations posted upthread, Taunton was the single biggest source of traffic on a cross-country service between Plymouth and Cogload Junction, so I'd be reasonably confident that omitting that call would cost the railway revenue. That is, unless someone can provide evidence of hordes of people in Plymouth that choose to drive because the train is ten minutes too slow for them. I'm not convinced these people exist in significant numbers, apart from the OP.

I'm not anti-Taunton, I was only pointing out that it used to be omitted a couple of decades ago. Neither would I particularly advocate a lesser service for some of the other places, I just think a handful of faster services would be worth it.
Meanwhile, it does fascinate me how people can be so defensive of keeping all stops in place, and yet presumably be supportive of HS2 despite it costing so many £billions, failing to serve the Midlands to Northeast market, and all whilst reducing the Euston to Birmingham journey time by barely 20 minutes from the present non stop possibility.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm not anti-Taunton, I was only pointing out that it used to be omitted a couple of decades ago. Neither would I particularly advocate a lesser service for some of the other places, I just think a handful of faster services would be worth it.
Meanwhile, it does fascinate me how people can be so defensive of keeping all stops in place, and yet presumably be supportive of HS2 despite it costing so many £billions, failing to serve the Midlands to Northeast market, and all whilst reducing the Euston to Birmingham journey time by barely 20 minutes from the present non stop possibility.

Another person who doesn't understand what HS2 is for. The purpose of HS2 is to take InterCity trains off the south WCML and the suburban routes around Manchester and Birmingham, and so to provide for an increased local service and more freight. The purpose of HS2 is NOT to speed up journeys. It just does that as a happy consequence.

Think of it as 6-tracking the WCML, and 4-tracking the 2-track bits. It's just cheaper to build that away from the main route, as to stick it alongside would require many thousands of homes to be compulsory purchased, not just some bits of farmland. Very similar to the route via Weedon bypassing Northampton, but on a larger scale.

 

[The Planner]

I'm not anti-Taunton, I was only pointing out that it used to be omitted a couple of decades ago. Neither would I particularly advocate a lesser service for some of the other places, I just think a handful of faster services would be worth it.
Meanwhile, it does fascinate me how people can be so defensive of keeping all stops in place, and yet presumably be supportive of HS2 despite it costing so many £billions, failing to serve the Midlands to Northeast market, and all whilst reducing the Euston to Birmingham journey time by barely 20 minutes from the present non stop possibility.

And taking those trains off the WCML, so you get the long distance fast trains you want whilst providing the capacity for the stoppers you don't want to be on.

 

[HSTEd]

Meanwhile, it does fascinate me how people can be so defensive of keeping all stops in place, and yet presumably be supportive of HS2 despite it costing so many £billions, failing to serve the Midlands to Northeast market, and all whilst reducing the Euston to Birmingham journey time by barely 20 minutes from the present non stop possibility.

Because HS2 gets its speed without demanding massively counterproductive sacrifices in capacity and service terms?

 

[6Gman]

Based on the (admittedly limited) observations posted upthread, Taunton was the single biggest source of traffic on a cross-country service between Plymouth and Cogload Junction, so I'd be reasonably confident that omitting that call would cost the railway revenue. That is, unless someone can provide evidence of hordes of people in Plymouth that choose to drive because the train is ten minutes too slow for them. I'm not convinced these people exist in significant numbers, apart from the OP.

A slightly faster journey might attract a few extra passengers but unlikely to cover the cost of providing the additional services.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Dec 2021 ==

I'm not anti-Taunton, I was only pointing out that it used to be omitted a couple of decades ago. Neither would I particularly advocate a lesser service for some of the other places, I just think a handful of faster services would be worth it.

Can you identify when this was, and what trains were involved.

Not my part of the country but I visited there a fair bit between the 1970s and 2000-ish and (outside summer Saturdays) I cannot remember ever passing through Taunton (or Cheltenham) without stopping. But it may be faulty memory so I'd be grateful for details.

 

[Shrop]

Can you identify when this was, and what trains were involved.

Not my part of the country but I visited there a fair bit between the 1970s and 2000-ish and (outside summer Saturdays) I cannot remember ever passing through Taunton (or Cheltenham) without stopping. But it may be faulty memory so I'd be grateful for details.

Here's a quick photo of my 1994-95 timetable which I happened to have to hand. This is Monday-Friday and you can see that the 13.30 from Birmingham stops only at Bristol TM and Exeter before Plymouth. This was the Dundee to Penzance service. From memory there were quite a few more in the 1970s and 1980s, I remember having to be careful on my Midlands railtourer not to get on the wrong train at Birmingham, as this was the only train leaving there that would take you outside the area of validity!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Dec 2021 ==

Another person who doesn't understand what HS2 is for. The purpose of HS2 is to take InterCity trains off the south WCML and the suburban routes around Manchester and Birmingham, and so to provide for an increased local service and more freight. The purpose of HS2 is NOT to speed up journeys. It just does that as a happy consequence.

Think of it as 6-tracking the WCML, and 4-tracking the 2-track bits. It's just cheaper to build that away from the main route, as to stick it alongside would require many thousands of homes to be compulsory purchased, not just some bits of farmland. Very similar to the route via Weedon bypassing Northampton, but on a larger scale.

Hmm, I'm as aware as most of how HS2 works in respect of incidental speed gains (or happy consequences!) and how it relieves WCML and suburban routes. What I don't get is why all this fuss about compulsory purchases, when miles and miles of tunnelling seemed to be no object through the Chilterns. Why not run close to the M1 where it's practical and tunnel under the areas where CP would be too onerous? I've often wondered whether the Chiltern route would still have been chosen if Heathrow hadn't been given so much weight in the period 2005-2010 when the options were being assessed.

 

[Starmill]

Why not run close to the M1 where it's practical and tunnel under the areas where CP would be too onerous?

You mean, just like they have done?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

There definitely were a few trains that passed through Taunton without stopping, during the 2000s when I was living there. However these were just a couple of London trains, not cross-country NE-SW ones.
There was also one daily morning service that ran fast from Taunton to Paddington, omitting Reading:- so there is a limited scope for "crack expresses" on major routes... but on Cross Country there isn't a dominant long-distance peak flow that would justify omitting calls at those "lesser" places a couple of times a day.

 

[Starmill]

There were quite a few GWR trains non-stop between Exeter St Davids and Reading until 2019. No more, but at least all of the fast trains are now fast between Taunton and Reading.

 

[Dr Day]

IIRC Welsh Government used to pay compensation to GWR for the lost revenue for one of the Swansea-Paddingtons in the morning not stopping at Reading.

 

[Shrop]

You mean, just like they have done?

I was talking about the HS2 route, which doesn't go anywhere near to the M1 between London and Birmingham

 

[Starmill]

I was talking about the HS2 route, which doesn't go anywhere near to the M1 between London and Birmingham

But an alignment was chosen which already does follow the major A roads and Motorways for periods, and for much of the rest of the route km is in tunnels. Just as you suggested.

 

[irish_rail]

I think we need to look at the bigger picture and the massively growing green agenda. We must start encouraging people onto trains who currently fly or drive. The south west is currently 3 and a half hours just from Birmingham. If the planners are really serious about getting people out of cars and off flights (I suspect not tbh) then we need to ask if the railway needs to be repurposed.
Taunton may have the most XC journeys between Plymouth and Cogload Junction, but I'd say with some certainty that is purely traffic to and from Bristol. There should be faster services Taunton to Bristol provided by GWR, and Taunton be omitted from long distance XC stuff. Otherwise we are never going to cut the emissions and get people using trains in great numbers over long routes that compete with airlines.

 

[30907]

It's a question of price elasticaties of journey times. How much extra are people willing to get better journey times? There are lots of useful answers to this in academic research, and there is even a dedicated industry tool called Moira which models it. The answer will be easily available for a few £k.

As Moira isn't free tonight
A Plymouth-Birmingham superfast would save about 20min (25 if you cut the wait at Temple Meads), which is a roughly 10% cut (more or less the same for each leg).
Let's say that produces a 10% uplift in traffic.
But customers from the 6 stations you've skipped are faced with a reduced service - which will inevitably reduce traffic from those....
So either you take the hit, or you run a duplicate service (as Irish Rail has just suggested) to avoid the loss of revenue - and obviously if traffic is growing, and you are already running full-length trains at busy times, that is the better way.
But - somebody will be dissatisfied, whatever you do!

 

[Mike Machin]

Unless we electrify the remainder of our railway network, we will soon be reaching the situation where travelling on ancient, crowded, un-hygienic, filthy, smoky and toxic-fume belching, clattering, rattling and foul-smelling diesel-powered trains will be considered far from being the ’green’ option.

My electric car can take 4 people in supreme climate-controlled near silence using nothing more than ovo energy derived from the wind!

The railway system will need to get is act together in the next few years or it will be game over for long-distance cross country passenger trains.

 

[Shrop]

But an alignment was chosen which already does follow the major A roads and Motorways for periods, and for much of the rest of the route km is in tunnels. Just as you suggested.

But what about this point ...

"I've often wondered whether the Chiltern route would still have been chosen if Heathrow hadn't been given so much weight in the period 2005-2010 when the options were being assessed"

 

[Starmill]

But what about this point ...

"I've often wondered whether the Chiltern route would still have been chosen if Heathrow hadn't been given so much weight in the period 2005-2010 when the options were being assessed"

What about it? There's still good Heathrow and GWML connectivity with the chosen route. An alternative would have been more expensive and less useful.

 

[Shrop]

What about it? There's still good Heathrow and GWML connectivity with the chosen route. An alternative would have been more expensive and less useful.

Is there really a lot of point in serving Heathrow? And can serving GWML really be justified when linking into Kent and the whole of Europe isn't (since HS1-HS2 link was abandoned)? If it was really worth that much to make the connections you suggest, then the remarkable lack of action to ever link from Willesden to OOC (and Heathrow) over the last few decades, at relatively low cost, must surely be questionable!

 

[IanXC]

And as for the hourly "crack express" which was proposed to call at York on alternate hours, and otherwise non-stop to Newcastle, these are distances of 188 and 268 miles, and you're talking about either zero or one stops.

Yes that's why I thought it was worthy of comparison. Clearly the potential demand on the ECML is reflected in the number of services in each hour, such that contemplating 'crack expresses' is plausible, but couldn't be made to work with even that many services on the same axis - that says somethign about your Plymouth - Birmingham scheme.

My first mention was Plymouth to Birmingham, which is 218 miles, and this can't be done with less than EIGHT stops. It's not comparable with London to Newcastle.

I would suggest it is eminently comparable. It's perfectly plausible to catch a service from King's Cross calling at Peterborough, Grantham, Newark, Retford, Doncaster, York, Darlington, Durham and Newcastle. Oh look, thats 8 intermediate stops....

And I reiterate, if there are unacceptable impacts on local journeys then we need to be looking at additional track, which of course would also benefit freight.

Ah so you're moving the goal posts to allow for infrastructure interventions?

The reality is that for the vast majority of routes limited stop expresses cannot be acceptably achieved without infrastructure work and/or additional services to maintain connectivity.

 

[Bald Rick]

Coventry to New Street needs doing anyway

It’s being done, albeit from not quite Coventry to not quite New St.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Dec 2021 ==

Here's a quick photo of my 1994-95 timetable which I happened to have to hand. This is Monday-Friday and you can see that the 13.30 from Birmingham stops only at Bristol TM and Exeter before Plymouth.

That train, at that time, was the least reliable service on the whole network...

The south west is currently 3 and a half hours just from Birmingham. If the planners are really serious about getting people out of cars and off flights (I suspect not tbh) then we need to ask if the railway needs to be repurposed.

Planners aren’t bothered about getting people out of cars and off flights. They are serious about improving the socio economic value of the country, and simultaneously reducing the impact of economic activity on the environment. Ie bothered about results, not the inputs.

 

[Shrop]

That train, at that time, was the least reliable service on the whole network...

Once again my comments have been taken out of context. As I've already said, this was one train that I happened to find, out of many. The fact that it wasn't reliable is not relevant to any discussion.

If there's one thing that it demonstrates by mentioning how unreliable this service was, it's that the unreliability of rail services in the UK seems to be proportional to the distance they run.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Dec 2021 ==

I would suggest it is eminently comparable. It's perfectly plausible to catch a service from King's Cross calling at Peterborough, Grantham, Newark, Retford, Doncaster, York, Darlington, Durham and Newcastle. Oh look, thats 8 intermediate stops...

So you're suggesting that ALL trains from London to Newcastle and Edinburgh, should stop at all of those intermediate stations? That is the comparison ...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Dec 2021 ==

Would revenue drop though? Im not convinced , as with a decent faster XC service, more people from Plymouth and Exeter and their localities would take the train instead of driving or flying.

completely agree with the OP, that XC should provide some services, maybe 3 a day that are Plymouth, Exeter, Bristol, Birmingham.
Trouble would be is these trains would end up being too popular and become overcrowded I expect. GWR used to run the 1206 Padd to PZ fast Reading to Exeter, no coincidence it was the busiest train of the day!

Good to have someone agreeing with me! So many people seem to rely on theory and what suits operational convenience, often appearing to not have a great deal of actual experience of rail travel and talking to other passengers. A lot of my comments are based on talking to others both on trains and outside railways, who give their reasons for using or not using trains. I'm not convinced that some of those who post have that depth of understanding

 

[Starmill]

So you're suggesting that ALL trains from London to Newcastle and Edinburgh, should stop at all of those intermediate stations? That is the comparison ...

If you take a look at the timetable which went out for consultation for this route you will see how much damage improved end-to-end journey times would have done at some of the intermediate stations.