• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

New North Wales to Manchester train services

Status
Not open for further replies.

davsarg

Member
Joined
15 Jan 2015
Messages
63
Of course they are. I thought you were complaining that a 175/1 (3 Car) and a 175/0 (2 Car) were working the wrong trains. You said originally that there was an unsuitabity problem, now you're saying there isn't because they are both 175s.

I assumed you meant unsuitable in this case meant unsuitable for any other route they may have ended up working.

No my complaint is because 2 cars on the 6:53 is not enough for the number of passengers who use it - unless you like to be a sardine? When I see the earlier 3 car train less than half full even at the point it reaches Manchester I can't help wondering why a simple bit of common sense can't be applied and simply send out a 3 car rather than 2 car set on the 6:53. From what I've seen, of the number of pax between Chester and Manchester through the day certainly justifies it.
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

PHILIPE

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Nov 2011
Messages
13,472
Location
Caerphilly
I assumed you meant unsuitable in this case meant unsuitable for any other route they may have ended up working.

No my complaint is because 2 cars on the 6:53 is not enough for the number of passengers who use it - unless you like to be a sardine? When I see the earlier 3 car train less than half full even at the point it reaches Manchester I can't help wondering why a simple bit of common sense can't be applied and simply send out a 3 car rather than 2 car set on the 6:53. From what I've seen, of the number of pax between Chester and Manchester through the day certainly justifies it.

I don't think you understand my original reply. These are not the only trains that these diagrams work during the day. They have to be judged on what trains they work throughout the day not just on one in the morning. You could have somebody complaining like yourself about 2 trains in the evening, for example if they were swapped round..
 

158756

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2014
Messages
1,629
I don't think you understand my original reply. These are not the only trains that these diagrams work during the day. They have to be judged on what trains they work throughout the day not just on one in the morning. You could have somebody complaining like yourself about 2 trains in the evening, for example if they were swapped round..

Looking through Realtime Trains it looks like the 0551 stays on Llandudno-Manchester all day before working the 1719 Manchester-Chester, which I would think is quite busy.
The 0653 meanwhile does North to South Wales for most of the day.
 

davsarg

Member
Joined
15 Jan 2015
Messages
63
Looking through Realtime Trains it looks like the 0551 stays on Llandudno-Manchester all day before working the 1719 Manchester-Chester, which I would think is quite busy.
The 0653 meanwhile does North to South Wales for most of the day.

That's probably another good reason for using a 3car rather than a 2 car set then. Surely 2 cars isn't enough to service the entire length of the North to South Wales route?
 

PHILIPE

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Nov 2011
Messages
13,472
Location
Caerphilly
Looking through Realtime Trains it looks like the 0551 stays on Llandudno-Manchester all day before working the 1719 Manchester-Chester, which I would think is quite busy.
The 0653 meanwhile does North to South Wales for most of the day.

Quite. 17 19 ex Manchester is very busy, but a 2 Car would be sufficient for the work of the other one throughout the day, some of the trains are semi-local and no South Wales to Manchesters involved.
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
9,236
I assumed you meant unsuitable in this case meant unsuitable for any other route they may have ended up working.

No my complaint is because 2 cars on the 6:53 is not enough for the number of passengers who use it - unless you like to be a sardine? When I see the earlier 3 car train less than half full even at the point it reaches Manchester I can't help wondering why a simple bit of common sense can't be applied and simply send out a 3 car rather than 2 car set on the 6:53. From what I've seen, of the number of pax between Chester and Manchester through the day certainly justifies it.

Having worked as a unit diagrammer in the past I can assure you that every effort is made to use longer units on busier diagrams. But I stress that consideration has to be given to the whole diagram throughout the day, not just one train.

Unless, of course, one subscribes to the view that TOCs turn out inappropriate units just to spite the public! :)
 

craigybagel

Established Member
Joined
25 Oct 2012
Messages
5,829
Unless, of course, one subscribes to the view that TOCs turn out inappropriate units just to spite the public! :)

As you probably know yourself, lots of people do! Many of them can be found on this website <D

I've started journeys in the morning and had passengers being very confused as to why there's as many carriages as there are passengers on board. However, after a couple of hours we're in a rush hour somewhere and the train is full and standing and people are complaining it's not long enough!
 

berneyarms

Established Member
Joined
26 Nov 2013
Messages
3,114
Location
Dublin
A semi connnected issue i've got to ask about is:

the first two trains into Manchester from Frodsham in the morning are a 3 car 175 at 5:51 which originates in Chester and a 2 car 175 at 6:53 which originates in Llandudno. As you can imagine the 5:51 is very quiet all the way into Manchester, but the 6:53 is heaving even when it arrives at Frodsham! My question therefore is why on earth can't these two sets be swapped around? I mean, how hard can it be? Even if the earlier train was only a 2 car set it would still be reasonably quiet.

Sorry people - rant over.

The 3 car unit on the 05:51 ex-Frodsham then shuttles between Manchester Piccadilly and Llandudno or Llandudno Junction, and eventually operates the 17:19 ex-Manchester Piccadilly to Chester which I suspect would need to be a 3-car set!

The 2-car set heads to Holyhead, and then to Llanelli and back to Chester (leaving Cardiff at 18:21) which means that the trains it works later in the day are less likely require a 3-car set.

As others point out - you can't look at a single train in isolation, you need to see what it works throughout the day. With the limited number of sets that ATW have, they need to manage the sets to match demand as closely as possible.
 

Tracky

Member
Joined
18 Jul 2011
Messages
483
That's probably another good reason for using a 3car rather than a 2 car set then. Surely 2 cars isn't enough to service the entire length of the North to South Wales route?

Two car trains are far from ideal on any diagram as the popularity of rail travel is far greater than was expected when the trains were built only around 15 years ago.

Having said that, for much of the year, the diagram for the trains you mention cannot justify a three car. The service is busy from the North Wales Coast and from Frodsham most seats are taken. Some passengers have to stand for the short journey from Runcorn East to Warrington. Passengers joining at Earlestown and Newton Le Willows for Manchester will find the journey uncomfortable - but this is probably the case for most journeys of half an hour in to a major city in the morning.

The return journey is busy but not full and standing into Chester. From there it empties for the journey to Holyhead. Down to Llanelli it's a similar story - busy but with some seats available other than for short runs such as chester-wrexham at 1219.

The return to Chester conveniently misses the Cardiff evening peak.

On a semi related note, the 0712 Manchester had at least 15 empty seats in the front coach on Wednesday with nobody standing in the second. The rear two were both full with passengers standing in the aisles.

The reason. The stairs at Picc are at the rear of the train and they didn't want to have to walk or be behind everybody else.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,430
Two car trains are far from ideal on any diagram as the popularity of rail travel is far greater than was expected when the trains were built only around 15 years ago.

Having said that, for much of the year, the diagram for the trains you mention cannot justify a three car. The service is busy from the North Wales Coast and from Frodsham most seats are taken. Some passengers have to stand for the short journey from Runcorn East to Warrington. Passengers joining at Earlestown and Newton Le Willows for Manchester will find the journey uncomfortable - but this is probably the case for most journeys of half an hour in to a major city in the morning.
.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Two car trains are far from ideal on any diagram as the popularity of rail travel is far greater than was expected when the trains were built only around 15 years ago.

Having said that, for much of the year, the diagram for the trains you mention cannot justify a three car. The service is busy from the North Wales Coast and from Frodsham most seats are taken. Some passengers have to stand for the short journey from Runcorn East to Warrington. Passengers joining at Earlestown and Newton Le Willows for Manchester will find the journey uncomfortable - but this is probably the case for most journeys of half an hour in to a major city in the morning.
.

This is perhaps a problem of having too many TOCs.

If all the ex "Regional Railways" services were operated by one TOC, then they could solve this problem by using say a 2-car 158 for most of the diagram, but augment it with say a 150 between Chester and Manchester.
 
Last edited:

craigybagel

Established Member
Joined
25 Oct 2012
Messages
5,829
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


This is perhaps a problem of having too many TOCs.

If all the ex "Regional Railways" services were operated by one TOC, then they could solve this problem by using say a 2-car 158 for most of the diagram, but augment it with say a 150 between Chester and Manchester.

There's nothing to stop ATW doing that now, except for the same problem that exists nationwide and would probably also apply to a regional railways TOC: there aren't any spare.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
20,447
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
There's nothing to stop ATW doing that now, except for the same problem that exists nationwide and would probably also apply to a regional railways TOC: there aren't any spare.

That may be acceptable now, however in a few years time this won't hold water if large numbers of Pacers have been withdrawn for 'political' reasons.

I would rather have a lightly loaded Pacer than a more modern but overcrowded train.
 

Tracky

Member
Joined
18 Jul 2011
Messages
483
If all the ex "Regional Railways" services were operated by one TOC, then they could solve this problem by using say a 2-car 158 for most of the diagram, but augment it with say a 150 between Chester and Manchester.

Strengthening for parts of diagrams does happen. An awful lot. Trains are coupled and split far more than was ever intended.

The 0712 Chester - Manchester is two 15x units. They then spend the quiet part of the day on seperate diagrams.

In the afternoon a lightly loaded 2 car 175 arrives at Chester to be coupled to another to form a four car - this becomes the 1750 from Piccadilly. Having pairs of non gangwayed unit is far from ideal.

A huge amount of work goes in to optimising a very small fleet by ATW train planners and - I suspect their Northern and Great Western opposite numbers.
 

Rhydgaled

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2010
Messages
4,861
In the afternoon a lightly loaded 2 car 175 arrives at Chester to be coupled to another to form a four car - this becomes the 1750 from Piccadilly. Having pairs of non gangwayed unit is far from ideal.
Does the 4-car stay together through to Holyhead after that or does it split? If they stay together, while not ideal, I would say that is far, far, better than having a pair of non-UEG units split on-route.

In my view, new trains shouldn't be allowed to be built with that kind of operation in mind. Obviously therefore I am very displeased, to put it mildly, with the Great Western IEP order (and FirstGW's proposed AT300 order), which seem to be designed with portion working in mind and not a UEG in sight (UEGs are probably not possible with 125/140mph unts).

------------------------
UEG = Unit End Gangway
 

Welshman

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2010
Messages
3,068
Does the 4-car stay together through to Holyhead after that or does it split? If they stay together, while not ideal, I would say that is far, far, better than having a pair of non-UEG units split on-route.

No, it splits at Llandudno Junction, with the front unit going to Holyhead and the rear to Llandudno.
 

PHILIPE

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Nov 2011
Messages
13,472
Location
Caerphilly
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top