Manchester Intercity Services...

[RichW1]

Only just hit me when I was in Manchester recently (not that I had to be there to notice this) and realised that both Manchester and Liverpool have no Intercity services to the north!!!!! You can go from the suburbs at Wigan, but the business district of both cities has no Intercity service at all going north to Glasgow OR Edinburgh. This is appalling for the 2nd largest metropolitan area in Britain and I wondered if anyone knows if this is likely to be sorted out with electrification et al or if anyone knows of any plans to rectify this crazy situation in future TOC's plans!!

I mean where else can you think of where 2 city centres close to each other supporting millions of people, don't have any Intercity's going over 200miles to somewhere as important as the Central Belt?! Compare that with Leeds, Sheffield, Birmingham and Newcastle city centres - all have better links to Scotland by just having some and yet alongside Birmingham, Manchester is the next most important business district after London. Manchester isn't directly linked with the Northeast either!

 

[hairyhandedfool]

The 'intercity' services were transfered over to Transpennine Express at the XC franchise change. Transpennine Express also link Manchester (and Liverpool) with the northeast directly. Granted they are not exactly 'intercity' standard, but they are links to that part of the world.

Electrification would see the Manchester-Edinburgh/Glasgow services run using electric units (alledgedly 350s) but initially diverted via Chat Moss and Wigan last I heard.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The only link at present from the Manchester area is the First TPE services from Manchester Airport to both Glasgow and Edinburgh. Once the electrification of the Lancashire Triangle is completed, this will be a totally electrified route pattern from Manchester Airport.

Other people on this forum, far more qualified than I, will give you their reasons as why either Liverpool Lime Street and Manchester Piccadilly do not actually run terminal station to terminal station services at present, though these have been run in the past

 

[Nym]

Blame the DfT and ORR...

Used to be HSTs from Manchester to Scotland...

 

[sprinterguy]

Blame the DfT and ORR...

Used to be HSTs from Manchester to Scotland...

I didn’t think that was the case. I’m sure I remember class 86s+mark 2s on the Manchester to Scotland runs (Presumably 47 hauled as far as Preston, I only used to see them when they were in Cumbria). I also think that it was these services that XC used some of its' 158s on.

To the OP, as others have said, Manchester still has direct trains to Edinburgh and Glasgow, using Transpennine Express 185s since the route was split from Crosscountry. Liverpool however has really lost out big time on regional and Intercity services to a lot of places, not just Scotland.

 

[Johnny Lewis]

Eh?

I don't understand this thread at all.

There is a near-hourly service from Manchester to Scotland operated by TransPennine Express. Admittedly, these are not 'InterCity' services in their truest sense, but they still do the job, and TPE have doubled the patronage on their services since they took over the route from Virgin XC in 2007.

The lack of direct Liverpool / Scotland services is part of a deliberate policy introduced in 2003 by the then Liverpool-hating Strategic Rail Authority, who systematically stripped Liverpool of it's direct services to just about everywhere (prior to this, Liverpool had daily direct services to South Wales, the Thames Valley, South Coast and South West, as well as the single Scottish train that used to run).

The lack of Scottish services at least will hopefully be addressed as part of Network Rail's Route Utilisation Strategy for the WCML, which, following electrification between Liverpool and Wigan in 2014/2015, proposes a 2 hourly direct service between Liverpool and Scotland, (as well as a full hourly service from Manchester via the Chat Moss route and Wigan).

And as far as Manchester (and Liverpool) to the North East is concerned, well there are hourly services from Manchester to Newcastle, Middlesbrough and Scarborough, providing no less than three trains per hour between Manchester and York. A fourth train per hour runs Manchester to Hull. Of these, an hourly service runs to and from Liverpool.

So hardly no trains at all, as Rich alleges.

 

[RichW1]

I'm aware of the TPE to all of the destinations all peeps have suggested. I'm not for a moment saying there are no services, I'm just saying that none of those services are Intercity which I just find quite bemusing for such major destinations split by more than 200miles. A suburban unit like the TPE's (great though they are) aren't very quick at almost 4 hours!!! I just think most people would find it an oddity that two centres holding millions in their catchment aren't linked by an Intercity service instead of a 3car regional unit.

 

[tbtc]

The Manchester - Glasgow/Edinburgh service via the WCML is probably as frequent today as its ever been (hourly at times).

If 185s aren't "Intercity", then by the same logic Manchester/Liverpool lack "Intercity" links to Sheffield, Leeds, Newcastle etc.

185s are DMUs with First Class, capable of 100mph, so apart from the top-speed not *that* different from a Voyager, pretty decent units.

 

[Lad Brookes]

For comparison, digging out a Summer 2000 timetable...

Northbound weekday services:

From Manchester Piccadilly, services to Lancaster or beyond on the WCML:

0619, 0811, 1011, 1211, 1411, 1611, 1911, 2151 NWT to Barrow
0911, 1111, 1311, 1511, 1711 NWT to Windermere
1811 NWT to Lancaster

0611 VT to Edinburgh, shown as having a trolley. Would this have been a 158?
1121 VT (ex-Bournemouth) to Glasgow Central
1303 VT (ex-Plymouth) to Aberdeen via Edinburgh
1521 VT (ex-Brighton) to Edinburgh
1904 VT (ex-Bristol TM) to Edinburgh


From Liverpool Lime Street, services to Lancaster and beyond on the WCML:

0832, 1032, 1905 NWT to Morecambe
1232 NWT to Lancaster
1432, 1632 NWT to Barrow

1700 VT to Edinburgh (fairly sure this was a 158- I used the reverse working a few times from Lancaster at about this time)

 

[j0hn0]

The Manchester - Glasgow/Edinburgh service via the WCML is probably as frequent today as its ever been (hourly at times).

If 185s aren't "Intercity", then by the same logic Manchester/Liverpool lack "Intercity" links to Sheffield, Leeds, Newcastle etc.

185s are DMUs with First Class, capable of 100mph, so apart from the top-speed not *that* different from a Voyager, pretty decent units.

Good units yes, good intercity units? No

3 car trains without doors are the end of carriages and 100mph top speed are NOT satisfactory Intercity trains. And after less than an hour travelling on a 185, my orce starts to hurt

I am with Rich on this one

 

[tbtc]

Good units yes, good intercity units? No

3 car trains without doors are the end of carriages and 100mph top speed are NOT satisfactory Intercity trains. And after less than an hour travelling on a 185, my orce starts to hurt

I am with Rich on this one

But what makes "Intercity"?

We talk about it in threads like this as if there's a simple black/white definition. Does the door layout really matter that much?

Bear in mind that this route had 158s a few years ago - was it Intercity back then?

 

[Striker]

There are a lot of wild claims being made in this thread without any evidence. Who says Manchester is the most important business centre outside of London? Leeds is more important in banking terms for a start. And what does that have to do with the demand for travel from Manchester to the North?

 

[WestCoast]

There are a lot of wild claims being made in this thread without any evidence. Who says Manchester is the most important business centre outside of London? Leeds is more important in banking terms for a start. And what does that have to do with the demand for travel from Manchester to the North?

Whether it's right or wrong, Manchester is being promoted in a wider context as "England's second city".

I wouldn't be hard to make TPEs services from the Airport to Carlisle/Glasgow/Edinburgh more "up to intercity standard". Although, you have to ask yourself whether the previous voyagers were up to intercity standard! I'd say with better catering facilities and possibly more padded seats a 158 (or even a 185) would be every bit as adequate as a voyager.

Or TPE could have got the 180s before GC took them. Away from reliability issues, they are good "intercity" DMUs.

 

[WatcherZero]

There are a lot of wild claims being made in this thread without any evidence. Who says Manchester is the most important business centre outside of London? Leeds is more important in banking terms for a start. And what does that have to do with the demand for travel from Manchester to the North?

Lord Digby Jones of Birmingham just last week actually.

 

[Cherry_Picker]

He said Birmingham was "in danger" of losing its second city status to Manchester because Manchester has a higher profile, largely to the success of its football clubs, or at least that is what was reported on BBC Midlands today. The fact that he is probably going to run for mayor and he might be pushing for an angle cannot be ignored either.

I always thought the second city status was a somewhat pointless title based on the simple fact that Birmingham is (by quite a distance) the second biggest city in the country. The profile of a place really doesnt have that much to do with how much business happens there or what kind of transport links it has.

 

[radamfi]

We mustn't be obsessed with direct services. That is the British disease. There are regular Pendolino/Voyager services from Preston to Scotland where very frequent connections are available to the Manchester area. That is better than having a couple of direct loco hauled trains per day. Even when they existed, I mostly connected at Preston anyway.

 

[merlodlliw]

I recall the phase, "What Manchester does today,London does tomorrow"

In order of importance, the twin Cities divided by the Irwell, probably outweigh
all the rest, even the Liverpool Echo is printed in Oldham.

 

[Masbroughlad]

I do think that the top 10 (?) say largest cities should have through intercity trains between one another.

Then have a hub and spoke type arrangement.

 

[radamfi]

I always thought the second city status was a somewhat pointless title based on the simple fact that Birmingham is (by quite a distance) the second biggest city in the country. The profile of a place really doesnt have that much to do with how much business happens there or what kind of transport links it has.

It depends how you define 'city'. On a pure settlement basis, Birmingham is a much larger settlement than Manchester because Birmingham annexed so many suburbs whereas towns around Manchester kept their independence. For example, Old Trafford isn't even counted as part of 'Manchester proper'. Most people agree that comparing the size of the 'city proper' is irrelevant as it is the urban area that counts. Therefore it is more logical to compare the Greater Manchester Urban Area and West Midlands Urban Area as defined by the Office of National Statistics.

(These are not the same as the GM and WM counties, by the way, because Coventry is excluded from the WM Urban Area and the GM Urban Area doesn't extend as far as Wigan as there is a break in the urbanisation before you get to Wigan.)

On this basis, the WM Urban Area does slightly beat the GM Urban Area according to the 2001 Census: 2,284,093 vs 2,240,230. WM certainly does not beat GM by 'quite a distance'.

If you increase the radius beyond these immediate urban areas, if you draw a circle, say 40 miles around Manchester and 40 miles around Birmingham, there would be far more people around Manchester, as you would be including the major populated areas in Merseyside, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, and central/eastern Lancashire. By contrast, there is not much urbanisation around Birmingham outside the West Midlands county.

 

[RichW1]

He said Birmingham was "in danger" of losing its second city status to Manchester because Manchester has a higher profile, largely to the success of its football clubs, or at least that is what was reported on BBC Midlands today. The fact that he is probably going to run for mayor and he might be pushing for an angle cannot be ignored either.

I always thought the second city status was a somewhat pointless title based on the simple fact that Birmingham is (by quite a distance) the second biggest city in the country. The profile of a place really doesnt have that much to do with how much business happens there or what kind of transport links it has.

Radamfi said it all.

The GDP of the built up area surrounding and running into Manchester and the wider northwest metro is by far a larger population and built up mass centred on Manchester's CBD than Birmingham/West Midlands. Any google map or detailed map book will show this clearly in physical size and the Economic data for the NorthWest metro area also outstrips the metro area of West Midlands/built up area centred on Birminghams CBD. Manchesters CBD is running head to head at the moment with Birmingham in gross GDP which shows how much of the population, even though bigger in the northwest, is not as productive. However, it may also be worth noting at this point that a continuous urban land-use area links all these cities right around the Peak District National Park so treating it as the government proposes via HS2, as an economic region as one just like the Southeast metro may be a good suggestion in terms of marketing and selling abroad with much more impressive combined figures.

Either way, Manchester and Liverpool (although the junior partner in the Northwest) deserve Intercity's from their business centres to travel over 200miles to the likes of the Central Belt which its self hosts around 3.5 million people. To link millions of people with a 3 car suburban unit taking 4 hours doesn't seem like much of a service in the modern world.

With regard to 'what is Intercity?' I agree with Zoe this has been blurred so I would make a suggestion that the northern ring of urban development surrounding the national park could and probably should be treated as a regional suburban system looking at the distant 21st century. However, if a train passes through this area on a journey of 200 - 400 plus miles, then I think this should be denoted an 'Intercity' route meaning at least a capability of 125mph with buffet cars or some sort of food service. If regional trains like the Javelin trains were all capable of the same speeds, it still isn't the type of train I'd want to do 200miles or more on! I think interiors are designed to cope with the type of passenger flows using the service. As nice as TPE's are, I still prefer a Pendolino on a 200 mile run or more.

 

[RAPC]

I always thought the second city status was a somewhat pointless title based on the simple fact that Birmingham is (by quite a distance) the second biggest city in the country. The profile of a place really doesnt have that much to do with how much business happens there or what kind of transport links it has.

Indeed, but population is not a measure of commercial value either. Manchester and Edinburgh very much out-punch their weight on that basis. Birmingham actually under-indexes if you look at measures such as CBI and IoD data.

One of the reasons why Manchester is sometimes considered more of a 2nd city than Birmingham is actually because of transport, more specifically the airport as it is the largest outside of the London area. That is one area where Birmingham suffers due to the relatively small distance to the London airports meaning it is hard to sustain an airport beyond lo-co carriers and sun flights.

 

[driver9000]

0611 VT to Edinburgh, shown as having a trolley. Would this have been a 158?
1121 VT (ex-Bournemouth) to Glasgow Central
1303 VT (ex-Plymouth) to Aberdeen via Edinburgh
1521 VT (ex-Brighton) to Edinburgh
1904 VT (ex-Bristol TM) to Edinburgh

Yes, the 06:11 was a 158 that started from Manchester Airport around 05:45 and called at Carstairs before arriving in Edinburgh around 10:30. The return working to Manchester Airport left Edinburgh at either 18:45 or 19:45....I can't quite remember which despite being a regular user of it at the time.

The other services were class 47 hauled as far as Preston formed of 7 mk2f coaches except for the Plymouth-Aberdeen which was an HST. As I recall this service was titled The Devon Scot and the ex-Brighton was titled The Sussex Scot.

 

[radamfi]

The airport angle is interesting as it is another reason for Edinburgh's importance despite its relatively small urban area. Edinburgh airport has more passengers than Glasgow, presumably in large part due to its positioning between the two cities, whereas Glasgow airport is to the west of Glasgow, meaning it is less attractive to the east of Scotland.

 

[j0hn0]

But what makes "Intercity"?

We talk about it in threads like this as if there's a simple black/white definition. Does the door layout really matter that much?

Bear in mind that this route had 158s a few years ago - was it Intercity back then?

OK so simple definition, they cannot maintain mainline speeds, the doors were merely used to back up my claim because it is clear they were not designed for Intercity services, as in, trains that travel between more than 2 cities?

I dunno, intercity is probably the wrong word, maybe express?

 

[WatcherZero]

Long Distance perhaps the best. As opposed to Commuter/Urban (from the outside of a city to its centre) and Suburban (towns and villages around a city).

 

[Cherry_Picker]

Indeed, but population is not a measure of commercial value either. Manchester and Edinburgh very much out-punch their weight on that basis. Birmingham actually under-indexes if you look at measures such as CBI and IoD data.

One of the reasons why Manchester is sometimes considered more of a 2nd city than Birmingham is actually because of transport, more specifically the airport as it is the largest outside of the London area. That is one area where Birmingham suffers due to the relatively small distance to the London airports meaning it is hard to sustain an airport beyond lo-co carriers and sun flights.

This is a tangential point, but I am firmly of the opinion people are pushing HS2 through as they are isnt to have a third direct rail link between Birmingham and London, its to have a journey time of about 40 minutes between Birmingham airport and London. It's a very clever way of getting another airport serving the capital.

 

[Masbroughlad]

I think its due to the dors at the end of coaches, but to me a 158's interior feels much more suited to longer distances than a 185.

 

[Striker]

The airport angle is interesting as it is another reason for Edinburgh's importance despite its relatively small urban area. Edinburgh airport has more passengers than Glasgow, presumably in large part due to its positioning between the two cities, whereas Glasgow airport is to the west of Glasgow, meaning it is less attractive to the east of Scotland.

Don't forget that Glasgow has two airports serving it (although Prestwick is quite a long way out of the city, it does take a large proportion of the traffic which would otherwise serve Glasgow International), where as Edinburgh has just one airport.

 

[WestCoast]

I think its due to the dors at the end of coaches, but to me a 158's interior feels much more suited to longer distances than a 185.

Yes, the 158 was designed to be capable of operating long distances (as well as shorter ones). I maintain that 158s, comfort wise, are on the same level as any (CrossCountry) Voyager for long distance travel.

Having said that, the 185s are well suited to their task of high-volume medium-distance core TransPennine journeys, which have to also cater for busy commuter flows. The only problem is that they need to be longer -which is the DfTs fault.

However, The 185s just weren't designed for Manchester - Scotland!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I can feel that someone will shortly be suggesting a poll thread on this matter which might be fun to do on here, will do absolutely nothing to change how Britain as a whole views the Midlands and the North of England. Most people in the South just lump us all together as ...them up north!!

We recently have had North West versus North East debates on recent threads and now we are having Birmingham versus Manchester debates on this thread.:roll:

Can anyone remember EXACTLY the reason why this thread was posted. To all debatees, remember the old adage...KEEP CALM AND CARRY ON.

Over to you, Mr. Starter