LNER Leeds to Edinburgh?

[hexagon789]

Back in the day the morning Leeds to Edinburgh train was named "The North Briton". I remember using it in the early seventies.

Which was the successor to the pre-war LNER's long-standing Leeds/Glasgow train.

 

[GordonT]

Which was the successor to the pre-war LNER's long-standing Leeds/Glasgow train.

Not sure but I vaguely remember the "Thames-Clyde Express" from St. Pancras to Glasgow Central via Leeds and Settle.

 

[Topological]

LNER providing the service would allow a small follow on 80x order for when the latest keep Newton Aycliffe open order for the open access operators runs out.

My logic for using LNER is that CrossCountry should be terminating much further south than Edinburgh. Doubling the voyagers through the core section should be the priority.

Leeds is an obvious terminating point for the via Leeds. Whilst the via Doncaster could continue to Newcastle, York termination has much to support it.

That would save units, increase capacity on the core and ensure that there was a justified additional small 80x order in the coming years.

 

[hexagon789]

Not sure but I vaguely remember the "Thames-Clyde Express" from St. Pancras to Glasgow Central via Leeds and Settle.

That was the LMS working though. This was one was the LNER equivalent and left Leeds around 8.55am typically reaching Glasgow via York, Newcastle and Edinburgh at about 3pm with the same carriage set then returning to Leeds an hour later at 4pm.

Over the years various vans and through carriages were added/subtracted at the likes of York etc.

 

[Snex]

LNER providing the service would allow a small follow on 80x order for when the latest keep Newton Aycliffe open order for the open access operators runs out.

My logic for using LNER is that CrossCountry should be terminating much further south than Edinburgh. Doubling the voyagers through the core section should be the priority.

Leeds is an obvious terminating point for the via Leeds. Whilst the via Doncaster could continue to Newcastle, York termination has much to support it.

That would save units, increase capacity on the core and ensure that there was a justified additional small 80x order in the coming years.

Don't disagree with the XC part but it shouldn't be LNER running this extra service, it should be TPE which would give the North East a direct link to Manchester Airport, merged with the existing 2 hourly service upto Edinburgh.

Having a 9 car LNER service via Leeds from Newcastle is a complete waste of space and offers nothing. We don't need 4 TPH from Newcastle to London, plus Lumo and Grand Central on top.

 

[D365]

LNER providing the service would allow a small follow on 80x order for when the latest keep Newton Aycliffe open order for the open access operators runs out.

That would save units, increase capacity on the core and ensure that there was a justified additional small 80x order in the coming years.

Why would LNER procure more Hitachi stock when their latest rolling stock order is for CAF Class 897?

 

[YorksLad12]

It is just like the dead end of Manchester services, or indeed London ones.

That really slows down journeys between York and stations south of Doncaster, which is what the London to York services are about.

Granted. My thinking is that at some point we're going have to do odd things to squeeze a quart out of a pint pot; more trains per hour from York, but one of them takes a minor detour?

Out of interest. Why is the direct Leeds to Aberdeen being removed?

How would Leeds crew retain route knowledge from Leeds - York - Newcastle (which I assumed was the biggest driver for retaining this service)?

They won't. I think the most LNER drivers would do is north as far as Micklefield, then via Hambleton to Doncaster (and vice versa) for any issues between Leeds and Doncaster. It's probably going because it used to be an HST service, which have left Neville Hill. The Azumas don't bed there for the night, I think Doncaster is the nearest for them. So, start back from Kings Cross with a set coming off Bounds Green.

Leeds is an obvious terminating point for the via Leeds. Whilst the via Doncaster could continue to Newcastle, York termination has much to support it.

Not really. You'd need somewhere to stick the terminating unit. The paths at the moment don't help either; xx08 northbound, xx11 southbound. That will change from December 2025, but I doubt there's time to clean and turn around the set at Leeds. If they both terminated at York, however, it could come in as a via Leeds and head out as a via Doncaster... An additional question would be around flows from Birmingham and Derby to York and Newcastle - are they large enough to warrant keeping services running as far as Newcastle (where there is also no space)?

 

[WAO]

Much as I appreciate the complexities of change in the present railway with its inflexible TOC and rolling stock arrangements, it hardly makes a case for electrification (or other railway investment) when the industry cannot see its way to make good use of such a long wired route as Leeds - Edinburgh.

WAO

 

[Halish Railway]

Much as I appreciate the complexities of change in the present railway with its inflexible TOC and rolling stock arrangements, it hardly makes a case for electrification (or other railway investment) when the industry cannot see its way to make good use of such a long wired route as Leeds - Edinburgh.

WAO

Surely reintroducing the Liverpool to Edinburgh service would be the headlining service that can make use of new electrification enabling hundreds of miles of continuous electrification, even better if it’s worked by a brand new 7 or 8 carriage train.

 

[JonathanH]

more trains per hour from York, but one of them takes a minor detour?

Not minor though, and is York to Doncaster actually congested infrastructure? York to Doncaster is about 25 minutes direct and about an hour via Leeds once dwells at Leeds and Wakefield are taken into account.

 

[JKF]

It’s a bit frustrating when LNER have good offers and to take advantage on a journey to Scotland you need to get a separate connecting train to York which can be almost as expensive.

I’m not sure if it’s still the case but you used to not be able to get cheap advance fares Leeds-York, and as you’re ending up outside the PTE area it was quite expensive and I think required two singles if not coming back the same day. When someone upthread mentioned trains out the east of Leeds often not at capacity this will be one of the reasons. Going west is somewhat cheaper!

 

[Snex]

Not minor though, and is York to Doncaster actually congested infrastructure? York to Doncaster is about 25 minutes direct and about an hour via Leeds once dwells at Leeds and Wakefield are taken into account.

More importantly is there even need for more trains from York. There's already 3 TPH plus Grand Central and also Lumo bypassing it.

How many trains is there really needed...? It's a tiny city in comparison to most places with a bit of a tourism trade but that generally flows in the opposite direction to most other people on the ECML.

 

[WAO]

Surely reintroducing the Liverpool to Edinburgh service would be the headlining service that can make use of new electrification enabling hundreds of miles of continuous electrification, even better if it’s worked by a brand new 7 or 8 carriage train.

Not much use to a Yorkshireman.

IIRC, an EMU service from Lancashire (albeit Manchester!) to Scotland started as soon as the wires reached Parkside from Deansgate.

There may be a case for levying track access charges for say 8 cars even if only two are operated, where there are pathing limits.

WAO

 

[swt_passenger]

Not much use to a Yorkshireman.

IIRC, an EMU service from Lancashire (albeit Manchester!) to Scotland started as soon as the wires reached Parkside from Deansgate.

There may be a case for levying track access charges for say 8 cars even if only two are operated, where there are pathing limits.

WAO

Isn’t this proposing reintroduction of a through TPE Liverpool to Edinburgh service via Leeds, York and Newcastle? The hoped for regular service never really got started and was reduced to a separate 2 hourly service between Newcastle and Edinburgh?

 

[dk1]

Isn’t this proposing reintroduction of a through TPE Liverpool to Edinburgh service via Leeds, York and Newcastle? The hoped for regular service never really got started and was reduced to a separate 2 hourly service between Newcastle and Edinburgh?

One direct service daily on this route but only southbound and frequently affected by Trans-Pennine route upgrade works.

 

[WAO]

You could be at Carlisle quicker than at York, going to Scotland that way.

WAO

 

[skyhigh]

It's probably going because it used to be an HST service, which have left Neville Hill. The Azumas don't bed there for the night, I think Doncaster is the nearest for them.

Azumas definitely stable overnight at Neville Hill.

 

[YorksLad12]

Azumas definitely stable overnight at Neville Hill.

I stand corrected; I thought it was just the 225 sets (plus Northern’s units).

 

[Halish Railway]

Not much use to a Yorkshireman.

IIRC, an EMU service from Lancashire (albeit Manchester!) to Scotland started as soon as the wires reached Parkside from Deansgate.

That electric service was introduced, indeed routed via Wigan instead of via Bolton as a matter of urgency to displace 185s to work the new Liverpool to Newcastle via Manchester Victoria service, with the Manchester Airport to Newcastle service being cut back to York before being re-extended to Newcastle.

You could be at Carlisle quicker than at York, going to Scotland that way.

WAO

Manchester to York is slated to be possible in 63-66 minutes. That would give a Manchester Victoria to Edinburgh via ECML travel time of around 3 hours 40 minutes. Yes that’s certainly not as good as the 3 hours 10 minutes of the WCML service but it provides alternatives in the event of disruption and much more capacity. I doubt that non-time conscious travellers would mind the extra travel time if the price of an AP ticket was lower than via the WCML.

Most of all though it’s a sensible way of providing extra capacity between Leeds and Edinburgh without requiring an extra path between Leeds and York or the faff of terminating a train on the through platforms at Leeds.

 

[NER1621]

It's a tiny city in comparison to most places with a bit of a tourism trade

The phrase “a bit of a tourism trade” in relation to York is doing a lot of heavy lifting there!

 

[WAO]

The original point of this discussion was that more Leeds York and onwards passenger trains should be electrically hauled. The 2009 RUS (p26) pointed out that North of York more than 50% of passenger tonnage was Diesel hauled. TPE should solve itself eventually but when XC is struggling with capacity, there is surely a prima facie case for splitting XC around Leeds (or even Sheffield with bi-modes) and strengthening the Diesel services to the South. Yes there all sorts of problems with stock choice, station congestion, TOC boundaries etc but this must be the way to go.

I am a fan of Voyagers, having had excellent experience over 15 years. They just need more of them (and better toilet extract!).

WAO

 

[Trainbike46]

The original point of this discussion was that more Leeds York and onwards passenger trains should be electrically hauled. The 2009 RUS (p26) pointed out that North of York more than 50% of passenger tonnage was Diesel hauled. TPE should solve itself eventually but when XC is struggling with capacity, there is surely a prima facie case for splitting XC around Leeds (or even Sheffield with bi-modes) and strengthening the Diesel services to the South. Yes there all sorts of problems with stock choice, station congestion, TOC boundaries etc but this must be the way to go.

I am a fan of Voyagers, having had excellent experience over 15 years. They just need more of them (and better toilet extract!).

WAO

Of course, a lot of that would have been LNER HSTs, which were replaced with electric or bimode 80x. As you say TPE will resolve itself once the power upgrade is finally complete. XC would ideally have bimodes, but I think the best we can hope for is that, in addition to the 12 ex-avanti voyagers they will get the 8 remaining ex-avanti voyagers as well.

 

[Falcon1200]

there is surely a prima facie case for splitting XC around Leeds (or even Sheffield with bi-modes) and strengthening the Diesel services to the South. Yes there all sorts of problems with stock choice, station congestion, TOC boundaries etc but this must be the way to go.

There is also the huge drawback of abandoning through services between Scotland and anywhere on the XC network south of Leeds or Sheffield! (except Birmingham, but the WCML service is only 2-hourly from Edinburgh and, at times, unbelievably, 4-hourly from Glasgow. The solution is indeed bi-modes for XC.

 

[Kee86]

Always nice when someone types before checking the timetable.
There has been a northbound morning service with a balancing southbound service for many decades now…

Maybe but up until the Eureka timetable of 2011 it started from Glasgow at 8pm and terminated at York on Mondays to Thursdays and ran to King's Cross on Friday though stopped doing so in 2002 when terminated at I think York or Doncaster whilst the 1818 ran Aberdeen to Edinburgh before in 2011 once again becoming the Aberdeen to Leeds train!

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

The phrase “a bit of a tourism trade” in relation to York is doing a lot of heavy lifting there!

So too is "tiny city": depending on source/geographic definition it's population is between 140,000 and a shade over 200,000. Not large but absolutely not tiny. And in railway terms it has a substantial hinterland as post Beeching plenty of travellers do indeed use it as a railhead in the way Beeching had expected.

 

[Snex]

So too is "tiny city": depending on source/geographic definition it's population is between 140,000 and a shade over 200,000. Not large but absolutely not tiny. And in railway terms it has a substantial hinterland as post Beeching plenty of travellers do indeed use it as a railhead in the way Beeching had expected.

Compared to the other cities in the North it is though; Leeds, Sheffield, Nottingham, Liverpool and Manchester don't have more than 3 TPH from London and they're mostly areas of 1 million+

No arguments about tourism but it flows in the opposite direction and again most the places above will have as much, if not more anyway.

York has a good service, arguably the best service in the country outside of the major cities. It doesn't need more trains to London at the cost of other links like Sheffield to Edinburgh, as it's all the OP is doing pretty much because Crosscountry has the wrong trains.

 

[A S Leib]

Compared to the other cities in the North it is though; Leeds, Sheffield, Nottingham, Liverpool and Manchester don't have more than 3 TPH from London and they're mostly areas of 1 million+

No arguments about tourism but it flows in the opposite direction and again most the places above will have as much, if not more anyway.

York has a good service, arguably the best service in the country outside of the major cities. It doesn't need more trains to London at the cost of other links like Sheffield to Edinburgh, as it's all the OP is doing pretty much because Crosscountry has the wrong trains.

As with Swindon, I think York's strong London service is due to its place on the network as much as to do with demand to it. Without a faster route between Sheffield and Leeds, a Liverpool Lime Street High Level – Prestatyn tunnel, reinstatement of a north-south route through Nottingham or massive works around Castlefield, those cities aren't going to have the same level of demand for through services as York.

I think the current / planned for this December levels of London services are as far as it should go for now. If HS2 had been going ahead in full, I think 4-5 tph for London – York would have been justifiable (2 tph HS2, 1 tph via Peterborough, Newark and Doncaster, 1 tph via smaller ECML stations plus Grand Central), but without it, other services should be prioritised even considering how much rail demand to / from London compared to other cities there often is.

 

[Rudders]

One train at 0710, which is really only for stock movement, is pretty meaningless. It’s also going with the 2025 timetable recast

It’s a shame that this train is going. Myself and others used it to get Edinburgh from Leeds for a decent time. It was well used by folk in financial and oil industry.
It really really suffered when they took the HST off it IMO. Quite a lot took 1st class on corporate and enjoyed the cooked breakfast. Since azuma introduced that seemed to get loads worse. I guess MS Teams is killing long distance corporate rail travel too.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

As with Swindon, I think York's strong London service is due to its place on the network as much as to do with demand to it. Without a faster route between Sheffield and Leeds, a Liverpool Lime Street High Level – Prestatyn tunnel, reinstatement of a north-south route through Nottingham or massive works around Castlefield, those cities aren't going to have the same level of demand for through services as York.

Absolutely the case, you can't argue with geography!

No arguments about tourism but it flows in the opposite direction and again most the places above will have as much, if not more anyway.

York lies roughly half way between London and Edinburgh. Plenty of foreign tourists visit all 3 cities as part of a single holiday. To say the tourist flow is all in one direction is plain wrong.

 

[Ken H]

York also acts as an inter city railhead for Malton, Scarborough, Pickering, Thirsk and Harrogate. OK people may get local services to York but join their 'main train ' in York. Thats why York has a better service than its size warrants.