New routes for Avanti?

[dk1]

The Stranraer suggestion is confusing me. It seems a total lost cause. Very indirect routing and no longer serves as a ferry port. In fact it only handled a paltry 30,196 entries/exits in the 2024/25 financial year.

 

[Mgameing123]

Hello, this is pure speculation and what ifs. If Avanti could implement new routes where would they go to? Maybe Inverness or Aberdeen?

No just no. We dont need more people experiencing their horrific cancellations!

 

[Bill57p9]

Well, they ran a crowd-busting Ayr - Glasgow service that used the stock for the Royal Scot so advertised as a through service. Doubt Ayrshire -the South traffic would have made it viable.

Absolutely. I believe it was introduced with the Ayrshire electrification and utilised stock that would otherwise have been stationary in Polmadie, so no additional stock was needed.

There may well be other routes that could be bolted on at The start or end of day, though I do think Windermere is a great shout.

 

[Lemmy99uk]

There may well be other routes that could be bolted on at The start or end of day, though I do think Windermere is a great shout.

Or better still, convert the Windermere branch to tram operation and street run them to the promenade at Bowness to connect with the ferries.

 

[Howardh]

I accept that getting a pendo though the Castle field corridor is a no-no, but it is a bit absurd that Bolton can't be directly linked to London when all the infrastructure is there.

Maybe one day, thinking 15 to 20 years hence, there will be good enough capacity improvements to allow this, although I feel it could be done Bolton to London via a new loop at Wigan where one possibly used to be? So no need to block the corridor!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Jan 2026 ==

Or better still, convert the Windermere branch to tram operation and street run them to the promenade at Bowness to connect with the ferries.

Just a frequent tram shuttle with passing loop between Oxenholme and Windermere would do!

 

[FGWHST43009]

Just a frequent tram shuttle with passing loop between Oxenholme and Windermere would do!

If you bought Stadler Citylinks then there's no impact to journey times as the linespeed is 60mph which is the max speed of Citylink tram-trains. Given there are only limited through trains from Windermere to Manchester it would allow simplification of the service pattern although it's hard to tell where a depot would go

 

[tbtc]

Absolutely. I believe it was introduced with the Ayrshire electrification and utilised stock that would otherwise have been stationary in Polmadie, so no additional stock was needed.

There may well be other routes that could be bolted on at The start or end of day, though I do think Windermere is a great shout.

This is the way I'd approach the "problem"

Ayr was feasible for BR because the first London - Glasgow service of the day only arrived at Central late morning (AFAICR), so there were train(s) at Polmadie sitting idle in the morning peak not needed until something like a 10:00 from Central to Euston. Why not use that for additional capacity on the newly electrified Ayr-Glasgow line, providing additional capacity there, whilst cascaded EMU (s) boosted lines like Greenock?

The same approach worked for the Chieftain - the first Kings Cross services didn't arrive at Waverly until late morning so one of the HSTs could be used to start back at Inverness, arriving in Edinburgh in time to meet the existing Craigentinny -operated service to London. Same thing at tea time, the half six arrival from London would otherwise run ECS to Craigentinny so could provide a northbound Inverness service

Joined up thinking.

So, my starting point for the WCML would be "what units current start their diagrams relatively late/ finish up relatively early" (rather than "here's a 1950s timetable/map")

Could a unit that currently leaves Oxley relatively late in the morning be used to start back at Bromsgrove (or Shrewsbury, if bi- mode - it might be fifth time lucky for a London service)? An Ayr service might work for similar reasons

Inverness would be a real headache though. Firstly, you'd be finding a spare path on the single track HML that wasn't going to serve Edinburgh or Glasgow.

Secondly, you'd have to work out how to staff it - are you paying for multiple rooms overnight/ sufficient break before working back south/ maintaining sufficient crew with knowledge to operate it - a real headache for infrequent services over long distances beyond the 'core'

BUT also consider the ECML, where the daily extensions to Sunderland and Stirling didn't last particularly long, the Sunderland one was certainly caped at Newcastle fairly often. These kind of routes are great for a bit of publicity but it's operationally awkward to reliably maintain such extensions of such long trains/services. Look at Bradford where a 125mph train does the twenty minute trundle from Leeds, sits at Forster Square for over an hour (necessitating millions of pounds for an additional platform so it can dwell there) then trundles back towards Leeds, at which point the next one heads towards Bradford for an eighty minute layover... All at times when people complain about LNER not having sufficient capacity for their London - Leeds trains...

Best to focus on corridors/times that are already busy (e.g. the commuters from Ayrshire into Glasgow)

 

[NCT]

All Manchester trains start from a suburb, going through all compass directions. Re-engineer the Bury line back to heavy rail standards so Bury can can direct trains to London.

At the London end, have the 40-odd daily trains all reaching a unique destination on the coast, using the ELL, Thameslink, WLL as imaginatively as possible, and HS1 via the NLL. With selected extensions to Palermo via the Channel Tunnel, Paris RER, Cote d'Azure and the train ferry. A daily train to China when geopolitical conditions allow.

Have a fleet of all-mode loco-hauled coaching stock with tilt. And have every 2 carriages share an auxiliary self power unit so the coaches can self shunt in pairs, thus allowing maximum train-length flexibility for different times of the day.

 

[Topological]

Bolton to London via Preston would not be the stupidest idea in the history of ideas. It is as valid as Blackpool to use a marginal time set.

 

[Farigiraf]

All Manchester trains start from a suburb, going through all compass directions. Re-engineer the Bury line back to heavy rail standards so Bury can can direct trains to London.

At the London end, have the 40-odd daily trains all reaching a unique destination on the coast, using the ELL, Thameslink, WLL as imaginatively as possible, and HS1 via the NLL. With selected extensions to Palermo via the Channel Tunnel, Paris RER, Cote d'Azure and the train ferry. A daily train to China when geopolitical conditions allow.

Have a fleet of all-mode loco-hauled coaching stock with tilt. And have every 2 carriages share an auxiliary self power unit so the coaches can self shunt in pairs, thus allowing maximum train-length flexibility for different times of the day.

Not to mention reopening and electrification of Skipton-Colne with a half-hourly service from Skipton to Euston via Burnley

 

[Uncle Buck]

All Manchester trains start from a suburb, going through all compass directions. Re-engineer the Bury line back to heavy rail standards so Bury can can direct trains to London.

At the London end, have the 40-odd daily trains all reaching a unique destination on the coast, using the ELL, Thameslink, WLL as imaginatively as possible, and HS1 via the NLL. With selected extensions to Palermo via the Channel Tunnel, Paris RER, Cote d'Azure and the train ferry. A daily train to China when geopolitical conditions allow.

Have a fleet of all-mode loco-hauled coaching stock with tilt. And have every 2 carriages share an auxiliary self power unit so the coaches can self shunt in pairs, thus allowing maximum train-length flexibility for different times of the day.

Very droll…I almost believed this until you got to Palermo. You did not, however, advocate running through-London trains via the Acton-Northolt Line, nor did you advocate splitting trains, or getting HSTs back into service, so points deducted there.

Nevertheless, wouldn’t somewhere like Bury/Bolton/Rochdale/Stourbridge/Ayr etc be a good place to start a service or two per day in? These are sizeable places where travelling into the hub station to get an express train is sufficiently irksome as to put people off using the railway at all.

At the London end, I can’t see how there can at the present time be any space at all to allow WCML trains to run through to the south.

Bolton to London via Preston would not be the stupidest idea in the history of ideas. It is as valid as Blackpool to use a marginal time set.

Agreed.

Or better still, convert the Windermere branch to tram operation and street run them to the promenade at Bowness to connect with the ferries.

Hopefully this is as serious a proposal as the Palermo one!

 

[The Planner]

Bolton to London via Preston would not be the stupidest idea in the history of ideas. It is as valid as Blackpool to use a marginal time set.

Needs the reversal on both legs at Preston though, eats significantly into it.

 

[Topological]

Needs the reversal on both legs at Preston though, eats significantly into it.

The other reversal location would be Platform 1 at Wigan North Western, uses less time but possibly misses an important interchange location at Preston.

(Also misses the crew base at Preston, but crew could pass between Wigan and Preston or Bolton and Preston if needed)

I was just thinking what would be more effective to serve Bolton using electrified lines that did not touch Castlefield.

 

[Falcon1200]

An Ayr service might work for similar reasons

I would only see Ayr working with co-operation between Scotrail and Avanti, saving the former a morning peak EMU diagram and using dead time of one of the latter's Pendolinos. However there would still be the evening peak to cover! Back in the Day the Nightrider stock was used for an evening peak Glasgow C-Ayr working, and most excellent it was too, but no longer an option....(I had 47453 on the 1712 ex Glasgow C on this working on 14th December 1984).

 

[390136]

Yes, Pendolino is 217m for a 9-carriage, whereas the platforms at Manchester Airport are only 200m long.

Whether the signalling allows trains to overhang the platform I am not sure. Even then, the front passenger door would not be platformed.

I dream of the day they extend MIA, it would make turning 390's back to normal formation SO easy

 

[The Planner]

I dream of the day they extend MIA, it would make turning 390's back to normal formation SO easy

2028. Though I don't think it will fit an 11 car.

 

[390136]

2028. Though I don't think it will fit an 11 car.

Oh is it actually happening?!

As long as I can spin a 9 car, that's an improvement. Just need the drivers to sign it

 

[60159]

2028. Though I don't think it will fit an 11 car.

It won’t happen due to many difficulties, but I’d take Avanti off Scot-Birm and give it to X Country with hourly Gl-/Ed portions joining at Carl then onto Birm and then Plym/Reading. Use bi-modes and big enviro win, and huge increase in direct and faster journey oportunities for Scotland and WCML passengers.
Ed-Birm 5 hrs vis ECML but 4 on WCML.
Avanti get Scot-Man and possibly 397s.
Off topic but do we need TPE?
X Country more suited with LNER/Scotrail for Newcastle-Edb.
For me we should be looking at reorganising the whole of the north of England and anglo Scot express services but too big a task.

 

[Harpo]

I’d take Avanti off Scot-Birm and give it to X Country

They already have a brewery that fails to get anyone inebriated. Please, no more services for XC to fail on.

 

[Snow1964]

Platform capacity at Birmingham New Street is limited, so instead of trains starting/finishing at New Street there is a case to start some from Bromsgrove, with just an extra principle station too.

For years some trains continued to Wolverhampton, but not Telford or Shrewsbury (because that's where wires ended). The end of wires is now in a different place around Birmingham so ought to be considered.

I realise might not work as fast lines not wired near Kings Norton, so currently can't overtake the stoppers, but I think that is in Midlands rail hub plan anyway.

 

[markymark2000]

Avanti get Scot-Man and possibly 397s.

Avanti really need to take over the Glasgow/Edinburgh to Manchester Airport service and the Glasgow - Liverpool route. While it would waste rolling stock, they would be better buying more 807s for it and then move the 397s to somewhere else. 807s would mean a more uniform fleet for the operator, which should make maintenance and traction knowledge easier and save having a micro fleet.

 

[dk1]

Avanti really need to take over the Glasgow/Edinburgh to Manchester Airport service and the Glasgow - Liverpool route. While it would waste rolling stock, they would be better buying more 807s for it and then move the 397s to somewhere else. 807s would mean a more uniform fleet for the operator, which should make maintenance and traction knowledge easier and save having a micro fleet.

LNER don’t seem too bothered about having a uniform fleet after ordering 897s. Where would you send TPXs 397s?

 

[Bald Rick]

Avanti won’t exist under GBR.

Perhaps the thread would be better titled ‘new services run by the UK Government funded operator out of Euston’

My guess is that there will be some quite significant change in 2028/29.

 

[317 forever]

I wonder whether some trains to Glasgow Central could be rerouted via Dumfries and Kilmarnock and stop there, even if not at other intermediate stations? Admittedly they would need a diesel loco fitted at Carlisle. Also, due to platform lengths this may limit how many carriages could be used at these stations.

 

[dk1]

I wonder whether some trains to Glasgow Central could be rerouted via Dumfries and Kilmarnock and stop there, even if not at other intermediate stations? Admittedly they would need a diesel loco fitted at Carlisle. Also, due to platform lengths this may limit how many carriages could be used at these stations.

That’s one heck of a long way round for very little extra revenue.

 

[mmh]

Avanti won’t exist under GBR.

Perhaps the thread would be better titled ‘new services run by the UK Government funded operator out of Euston’

My guess is that there will be some quite significant change in 2028/29.

My guess is nothing significant will change because the staff and trains will still be at the depots they currently are, and there'll be little appetite for disruptive change from either railway management or politicians, who will both be very risk averse.

Nothing significant happened to the routes served from Euston after privatisation, why would nationalisation be any different?

 

[danbarjon]

LNER don’t seem too bothered about having a uniform fleet after ordering 897s. Where would you send TPXs 397s?

Could they not do the Newcastle to Edinburgh shuttles?

 

[JonathanH]

Could they not do the Newcastle to Edinburgh shuttles?

I'm not convinced that would ever need a fleet of 12 trains.

 

[danbarjon]

I'm not convinced that would ever need a fleet of 12 trains.

With maintenance and maybe giving some to LNER as they would have 897s, it could possibly work.

 

[dk1]

Could they not do the Newcastle to Edinburgh shuttles?

They could but there are 12 of them which is rather an overkill for the two-hourly route currently operated by TPE.