Liverpool to Hull direct train from December 2022

[swt_passenger]

Hull rather than Scarborough makes a lot of sense to me.

I am getting rather lost with where TP is heading in general with its routes though. There is this change and I now see they are going to run a Newcastle to Edinburgh stopper. Something you would have thought is more of a Northern or Scotrail job. Does this mean that regular direct express Edinburgh services from the TP core are not happening? A shame if so as Huddersfield/Leeds to Edinburgh would have been a genuinely useful service.

I looked for tomorrow and there seems to be just 1 direct service Huddersfield Edinburgh.

The through Edinburgh service is definitely not happening, it was basically withdrawn because there were just too many trains north of York and Newcastle for the planned 2022 ECML long distance timetable to work. Although that timetable is deferred, I suppose they no longer want to introduce a service just to withdraw it soon after…

 

[LittleAH]

I do wonder why the maximum train length on TPE is 6 carriages, and most services fall short of this. What is the maximum platform length on the core Newcastle - Manchester - Liverpool route assuming only major stops are served? Surely a quick win would be to increase train lengths rather than frequency, and the recent upgrade to the TPE fleet would have been the ideal time to address this.

Because the infrastructure isn't there. Huddersfield, Dewsbury, Newton-Le-Willows, Lea Green, Manchester Airport Malton etc all can't accommodate more than 6 cars. Even Manchester Victoria is constrained somewhat. And C-Asdo can't solve everything.

Interestingly, the wording of this version of the consultation document differs from that previously leaked on Twitter

As per MRTF. Somewhat to do with capacity - can't really see those stations getting 2tph through the day until the new bit of NPR track is built west of Huddersfield.

I am getting rather lost with where TP is heading in general with its routes though. There is this change and I now see they are going to run a Newcastle to Edinburgh stopper. Something you would have thought is more of a Northern or Scotrail job. Does this mean that regular direct express Edinburgh services from the TP core are not happening?

Stripped back as part of the ECML consultation. Which, when you see the numbers travelling on the WCML services from Manchester, makes little sense. But the LNER services have been prioritised.

 

[childwallblues]

Hull rather than Scarborough makes a lot of sense to me.

I am getting rather lost with where TP is heading in general with its routes though. There is this change and I now see they are going to run a Newcastle to Edinburgh stopper. Something you would have thought is more of a Northern or Scotrail job. Does this mean that regular direct express Edinburgh services from the TP core are not happening? A shame if so as Huddersfield/Leeds to Edinburgh would have been a genuinely useful service.

I looked for tomorrow and there seems to be just 1 direct service Huddersfield Edinburgh.

There is currently a 0724 Liverpool Lime Street to Edinburgh via Newcastle.

 

[daodao]

No through airport services, everything either goes via Guide Bridge to low numbered Pic platforms or Liverpool via Victoria. Castlefield is just another bottleneck that can and should be avoided by TPE North services

I agree wholeheartedly. I also agree with restoration of a direct Liverpool-Hull fast inter-city service via Standedge.

 

[mike57]

Because the infrastructure isn't there. Huddersfield, Dewsbury, Newton-Le-Willows, Lea Green, Manchester Airport Malton etc all can't accommodate more than 6 cars. Even Manchester Victoria is constrained somewhat. And C-Asdo can't solve everything.

Forget Lea Green, Dewsbury, Newton-le-Willows, Malton. A proper Intercity Newcastle/York to Manchester/Liverpool service should not be calling at those stations. My proposal would be 2tph Calling only at Newcastle, (1tph) Durham, Darlington, York (starting there 1tph) Leeds, Huddersfield, Man Vic, Liverpool (Or 1tph Liverpool, 1tph Man Pic into low number platforms via Guide Bridge). What could they accomodate? The remaining 2tph at 5/6 cars would become semi-fasts picking up the intermediate stations.

 

[modernrail]

Because the infrastructure isn't there. Huddersfield, Dewsbury, Newton-Le-Willows, Lea Green, Manchester Airport Malton etc all can't accommodate more than 6 cars. Even Manchester Victoria is constrained somewhat. And C-Asdo can't solve everything.

As per MRTF. Somewhat to do with capacity - can't really see those stations getting 2tph through the day until the new bit of NPR track is built west of Huddersfield.


Stripped back as part of the ECML consultation. Which, when you see the numbers travelling on the WCML services from Manchester, makes little sense. But the LNER services have been prioritised.

As per MRTF. Somewhat to do with capacity - can't really see those stations getting 2tph through the day until the new bit of NPR track is built west of Huddersfield.


Stripped back as part of the ECML consultation. Which, when you see the numbers travelling on the WCML services from Manchester, makes little sense. But the LNER services have been prioritised.

Thanks. That is what I thought, and is why I am confused by the announcement that TPE is going to run 5 stoppers a day between Newcastle and Edinburgh. Surely this is using more capacity than the originally planned express service from the core. Leaving aside whether such a service is required (I honestly don’t know) this is another case of the north being promised new connectivity just for that to be withdrawn. Mostly though I am just super confused bearing in mind why they said they could not run the express Edinburgh services.

Sorry, I know this is slightly off the thread question.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Dec 2021 ==

Forget Lea Green, Dewsbury, Newton-le-Willows, Malton. A proper Intercity Newcastle/York to Manchester/Liverpool service should not be calling at those stations. My proposal would be 2tph Calling only at Newcastle, (1tph) Durham, Darlington, York (starting there 1tph) Leeds, Huddersfield, Man Vic, Liverpool (Or 1tph Liverpool, 1tph Man Pic into low number platforms via Guide Bridge). What could they accomodate? The remaining 2tph at 5/6 cars would become semi-fasts picking up the intermediate stations.

As a Huddersfield man I obviously think all trains, planes and space ships should stop there, if only to admire the station. That said, I must concede I think the case for a 10 car Liverpool to Newcastle (or Edinburgh) express stopping only Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, York, Newcastle is strong. It would be a good way of providing capacity for reserved demand. Encourage as many advance punters as possible onto that service and so free up as much capacity as possible on other services for intermediate flows.

I actually used Liverpool Huddersfield a lot as I went to university in Liverpool but I would guess the vast majority of Huddersfield passengers are heading to Manchester or Leeds, mostly as commuters or for leisure purposes.

Can Huddersfield really not take 10 cars on the main platforms rather than platform 8 though? It probably does justify a stop on the basis of size of the town (largest in the UK) and connections down the Penistone and Brighouse lines.

 

[dk1]

There is currently a 0724 Liverpool Lime Street to Edinburgh via Newcastle.

Looks like that is chopped back to Newcastle from next weeks timetable change.

 

[Watershed]

Thanks. That is what I thought, and is why I am confused by the announcement that TPE is going to run 5 stoppers a day between Newcastle and Edinburgh. Surely this is using more capacity than the originally planned express service from the core.

No, splitting the service means it can be timed independently of the path south of Newcastle (hence why the connections between the two services at Newcastle aren't great). That means it can utilise gaps that it wouldn't otherwise be able to use.

Leaving aside whether such a service is required

If you want to have any sort of service at Reston (and East Linton when that opens), then it's required. Of course arguably those are both white elephants, but that is a separate matter...

this is another case of the north being promised new connectivity just for that to be withdrawn

What do you expect when the DfT has a tight budget and the choice is "get extra revenue from faster LNER services" or "spend extra money subsidising services which only provide a unique connection for Huddersfield to Edinburgh"...

 

[westv]

I'm curious to know why it takes a year to organise a direct Hull to Liverpool service.

 

[Djgr]

Thanks. That is what I thought, and is why I am confused by the announcement that TPE is going to run 5 stoppers a day between Newcastle and Edinburgh. Surely this is using more capacity than the originally planned express service from the core. Leaving aside whether such a service is required (I honestly don’t know) this is another case of the north being promised new connectivity just for that to be withdrawn. Mostly though I am just super confused bearing in mind why they said they could not run the express Edinburgh services.

Sorry, I know this is slightly off the thread question.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Dec 2021 ==


As a Huddersfield man I obviously think all trains, planes and space ships should stop there, if only to admire the station. That said, I must concede I think the case for a 10 car Liverpool to Newcastle (or Edinburgh) express stopping only Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, York, Newcastle is strong. It would be a good way of providing capacity for reserved demand. Encourage as many advance punters as possible onto that service and so free up as much capacity as possible on other services for intermediate flows.

I actually used Liverpool Huddersfield a lot as I went to university in Liverpool but I would guess the vast majority of Huddersfield passengers are heading to Manchester or Leeds, mostly as commuters or for leisure purposes.

Can Huddersfield really not take 10 cars on the main platforms rather than platform 8 though? It probably does justify a stop on the basis of size of the town (largest in the UK) and connections down the Penistone and Brighouse lines.

An interesting piece of trivia is when was the last time that there was a service timetabled to go through Huddersfield without stopping?

 

[Watershed]

I'm curious to know why it takes a year to organise a direct Hull to Liverpool service.

Because those are the timescales for proposing a permanent, notable timetable change. And rightly so, these things shouldn't just happen overnight on an arbitrary basis.

First there needs to be a public consultation, for which you need to allow the public a reasonable length of time to respond. After you've considered that and made any changes then there will be an internal cross-industry consultation.

It's only now that the work of actually timetabling it begins. This is probably the longest part of the process - first the TOC needs to construct a detailed proposal that works for them, and make sure there will be enough units and crew to operate it. Then they need to bid it to Network Rail and NR work on it for some time, sorting out any conflicts with what every other operator is proposing for that timetable change.

They offer that back to the TOC, you have some to-and-fro whilst any remaining issues are ironed out. And (in theory) that should then be ready about 5 months in advance of the start of the new timetable, so that engineering work changes can be bid and offered in time for tickets to go on sale 12 weeks in advance.

If you ask me, managing to do all of the first two paragraphs in 7 months sounds pretty quick.

 

[Peterthegreat]

An interesting piece of trivia is when was the last time that there was a service timetabled to go through Huddersfield without stopping?

Certainly into the mid seventies. I believe a Liverpool to Newcastle train (Sundays only?) was scheduled non stop from Man Vic to Leeds in about 70 minutes if I recall correctly.

 

[Greybeard33]

Because the infrastructure isn't there. Huddersfield, Dewsbury, Newton-Le-Willows, Lea Green, Manchester Airport Malton etc all can't accommodate more than 6 cars. Even Manchester Victoria is constrained somewhat. And C-Asdo can't solve everything.

All Manchester Airport platforms are at least 200m. So could accomodate 7x26m (80x variant), 7x23m+20m (7xMk5a+68) or 8x24m (lengthened 397).

 

[modernrail]

No, splitting the service means it can be timed independently of the path south of Newcastle (hence why the connections between the two services at Newcastle aren't great). That means it can utilise gaps that it wouldn't otherwise be able to use.


If you want to have any sort of service at Reston (and East Linton when that opens), then it's required. Of course arguably those are both white elephants, but that is a separate matter...


What do you expect when the DfT has a tight budget and the choice is "get extra revenue from faster LNER services" or "spend extra money subsidising services which only provide a unique connection for Huddersfield to Edinburgh"...

Thanks. That does make a bit more sense then.

I don’t so much mind the not providing it bit, it is more the saying you are going to provide it to great fanfare without checking the infrastructure can handle it, then withdrawing it. So many examples of this across Northern and TP over recent years. It has almost become a new sport. Doesn’t do any good whatsoever for the reputation of the railways in general. Just a series of false promises.

It is not just Huddersfield, the increased connectivity/capacity for Leeds and Bradford with a change at Leeds would also have been useful.

 

[Watershed]

I don’t so much mind the not providing it bit, it is more the saying you are going to provide it to great fanfare without checking the infrastructure can handle it, then withdrawing it. So many examples of this across Northern and TP over recent years. It has almost become a new sport. Doesn’t do any good whatsoever for the reputation of the railways in general. Just a series of false promises.

It's not that the infrastructure can't handle it, it's that the goalposts have been changed. When the service was introduced, there wasn't any suggestion that LNER's additional services would run in such a way as to preclude a through Liverpool-Edinburgh service.

But as you say, very poor expectation management all round. I'd expect nothing less from the DfT!

It is not just Huddersfield, the increased connectivity/capacity for Leeds and Bradford with a change at Leeds would also have been useful.

If the issue is capacity, the XC services should be lengthened (where they aren't already). Obviously having an additional tph is preferable, but where pre-Covid you would (theoretically) have one 5-coach 802 an hour, plus one 4 or 5 coach Voyager an hour - if you can guarantee a 9 car Voyager each hour, that's a reasonable alternative in the circumstances.

 

[swt_passenger]

It's not that the infrastructure can't handle it, it's that the goalposts have been changed. When the service was introduced, there wasn't any suggestion that LNER's additional services would run in such a way as to preclude a through Liverpool-Edinburgh service.

But as you say, very poor expectation management all round. I'd expect nothing less from the DfT!

I just had a scan of the ORR 2016 decision letter that led to this years eventual proposal for the 2022 main ECML operator’s timetable, including what is now LUMO.

It states that at that time TPE’s future services had not been taken into account, because at that time they had not been applied for. That applies to both the Liverpool train’s Edinburgh extension and the second train which was extended from York to Newcastle.

 

[Fokx]

Can Huddersfield really not take 10 cars on the main platforms rather than platform 8 though? It probably does justify a stop on the basis of size of the town (largest in the UK) and connections down the Penistone and Brighouse lines.

It can’t take more than 6 carriages (7 would be extremely tight)

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Dec 2021 ==

All Manchester Airport platforms are at least 200m. So could accomodate 7x26m (80x variant), 7x23m+20m (7xMk5a+68) or 8x24m (lengthened 397).

But then they don’t fit at Oxford Road (which isn’t exactly the worst problem)

MK5a’s are fixed formation and cannot be extended (allegedly)

 

[VauxhallNova]

It's not that the infrastructure can't handle it, it's that the goalposts have been changed. When the service was introduced, there wasn't any suggestion that LNER's additional services would run in such a way as to preclude a through Liverpool-Edinburgh service. But as you say, very poor expectation management all round. I'd expect nothing less from the DfT!

Do you know why TPE were only granted contingent rights for those trains?

Not sure it's the DfT's fault for "poor expectation management", as they accepted First's bid on the basis that it was First's risk. The extra LNER paths had been known about for a long time and were explicitly stated as being required to fit alongside any planned TPE trains in the TPE invitation to tender.

 

[Fokx]

Because the infrastructure isn't there. Huddersfield, Dewsbury, Newton-Le-Willows, Lea Green, Manchester Airport Malton etc all can't accommodate more than 6 cars. Even Manchester Victoria is constrained somewhat. And C-Asdo can't solve everything.

Additionally Manchester Piccadilly East platforms are struggling for capacity which is the root cause of selected Hull services running as single 185 units.

Then you’ll also have issues at Oxford Road which can’t take more than 6 (4/5 on selected platforms), Leeds where you can no longer use half of the through platforms, and Lime Street you would only be able to use 6-10 platforms which causes conflicting movements from the chat moss lines and could cause issues with Avanti’s plan for more frequent trains and TPE’s plan for Liverpool to Cleethropes which will also consume these platforms

 

[swt_passenger]

Do you know why TPE were only granted contingent rights for those trains?

The ORR decision letter for TPE’s Edinburgh service refers to not assuming the rights will continue, para 16:

16. Our own review did not identify any additional concerns with the proposed services for the duration requested. However, there are additional planned services on the ECML over the next few years, some of which, including LNER and East Coast Trains Ltd already have approved access rights. There is also an ECML ESG looking at how best to accommodate services from the December 2021 timetable. In these circumstances, we will consider any request to extend these rights in light of our statutory duties and the information available at the time and our usual presumption in favour of the extension of existing access rights should not be assumed.

https://www.orr.gov.uk/sites/default/files/om/first-transpennine-express-limited-28th-sa-decision-letter.pdf

Apologies for this getting off the original thread topic…

 

[faltskog36abba]

Looks like that is chopped back to Newcastle from next weeks timetable change.

That is a shame, I am glad I got that same service from Victoria to Edinburgh two months ago, It was busy from Newcastle too [Some people were saying it has been lightly loaded on leaving Newcastle].

 

[dk1]

That is a shame, I am glad I got that same service from Victoria to Edinburgh two months ago, It was busy from Newcastle too [Some people were saying it has been lightly loaded on leaving Newcastle].

Yes it seems all or most TPX services (think it’s 5 each-way to start with) north of Newcastle will be self contained & fully funded by the Scottish Office.

 

[Gareth]

That is a shame, I am glad I got that same service from Victoria to Edinburgh two months ago, It was busy from Newcastle too [Some people were saying it has been lightly loaded on leaving Newcastle].

Not sure it really makes sense to be going from anywhere in the North West to Edinburgh via Leeds & York. Edinburgh's actually west of Liverpool (just about). If the North West-Scotland services are inadequate than it's best to work on improving those. Perhaps more Liverpool-Scotland services, for instance.

 

[Watershed]

Yes it seems all or most TPX services (think it’s 5 each-way to start with) north of Newcastle will be self contained & fully funded by the Scottish Office.

Not sure about fully funded, but I trust a 'suitable' contribution will be made.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not sure it really makes sense to be going from anywhere in the North West to Edinburgh via Leeds & York. Edinburgh's actually west of Liverpool (just about). If the North West-Scotland services are inadequate than it's best to work on improving those. Perhaps more Liverpool-Scotland services, for instance.

Agreed. I think there is little that makes less sense than extending TPE to Edinburgh via the ECML. Newcastle is the natural terminus.

 

[ainsworth74]

Got to get those 802s to Craigentinny depot in Edinburgh somehow!

 

[dk1]

Not sure about fully funded, but I trust a 'suitable' contribution will be made.

I see Transport Scotland & Rail North Partnership to serve Reston amongst other local stations.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Dec 2021 ==

Got to get those 802s to Craigentinny depot in Edinburgh somehow!

Of course. It’s a win win really saving all ECS moves.

 

[adrock1976]

Got to get those 802s to Craigentinny depot in Edinburgh somehow!

Do TPE have their own depots at York and Ardwick (although may be a challenge to get them west of the Pennines owing to a lack of wires)?

I was always under the impression that Craigentinny is for InterCity East Coast (LNER).

 

[Urban-Savage]

Off on a tangent - but are TPE still running the Liverpool - Glasgow services ?

 

[swt_passenger]

Off on a tangent - but are TPE still running the Liverpool - Glasgow services ?

Yes, they were restored a while ago I think. Although it’s only a few a day each way, I think that was all they previously ran?