"Non-Pointless Journeys"

[Ivo]

The recent FGW Brighton thread was a very lively one. So it got me thinking: Are there any routes out there which others believe should exist but don't? A long-distance service into Brighton is an obvious one, but why not Blackpool (towards the south)? Why can't Oxford have its link with Bristol renewed?If Southern have to divert to Eastleigh, why can't they serve Southampton Airport Parkway? Similarly, why don't FGW serve the airport?

...The list goes on, but are there any that other people would like to discuss?

(One of two such threads I am running on specific routes.)

 

[northwichcat]

Blackpool-London proved unpopular and it was only MPs who were interested in such a service for party conferences.

The problem with the North-South XC routes is they all go via Birmingham and to get to the south coast like Bournemouth they first go to Reading so it doesn't make the direct train fast.

 

[jamesontheroad]

This is a tough one, because you will generate a lot of largely idiosyncratic aspirations from us, most of which are probably not viable.

However, that said, if there is still sufficient traffic across the Irish Sea for a Euston - Holyhead service, then I would argue the case for carefully scheduled Euston - Stranraer services. The rail enthusiast in me obviously wants a stub sleeper service that could join the Lowland Sleeper at Carlisle, but a daily Voyager round-trip working would suffice for now. I appreciate that Stranraer's days as a ferry terminal are numbered, but considering the need for alternatives to flying, NI should have a better through link to England than a) connecting in Glasgow, which adds hours to a trip; b) traveling via Dublin; or c) traveling on the mind-numbingly depressing overnight Ulsterbus / National Express coach.

 

[wintonian]

Basingstoke to Brighton - always seemed packed when I used it, but SWT withdrew it as it wasn't in the new franchise, mind you the Basingstoke to Portsmouth replacement is also rather busy.

 

[route:oxford]

The problem with the North-South XC routes is they all go via Birmingham and to get to the south coast like Bournemouth they first go to Reading so it doesn't make the direct train fast.

Quicker isn't always better when there is the opportunity to travel direct. Although clearly there is a margin to the toleration.

I for one really miss the Oxford-West Coast-Scotland routes and would be delighted if they were to return. Maybe one day when Reading is remodelled (and Oxford starts enjoying a south facing terminating platform) delays may be mitigated sufficiently to reintroduce a direct service.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Leicester to Manchester via Erewash line and avoiding Sheffield, stopping at Loughborough, East Midlands Parkway, Alfreton & Chesterfield

 

[wintonian]

Hmm the choice of one hour to go to Manchester or wait till the next and go to Sheffield, that was a handy way to work a direct service into both. Obviously to Sheffield it's via London now just to avoid a Voyager with high fares.

 

[dan_atki]

If Southern have to divert to Eastleigh, why can't they serve Southampton Airport Parkway? Similarly, why don't FGW serve the airport?

I believe the reason Southern don't serve Southampton Airport on the two trains that pass through Monday-Saturday (two of only four passenger trains to non-stop the station - the other 2 are evening FGW services to keep drivers' route knowledge upto scratch) is due to an agreement with SWT about station access.

Southern do want all their hourly Southampton to Brighton services to go via Eastleigh stopping at Southampton Airport, Eastleigh, Fareham, and then as now... whether they get anywhere with it is another matter.

 

[northwichcat]

I for one really miss the Oxford-West Coast-Scotland routes and would be delighted if they were to return. Maybe one day when Reading is remodelled (and Oxford starts enjoying a south facing terminating platform) delays may be mitigated sufficiently to reintroduce a direct service.

At the moment it would require either Birmingham-Scotland or Manchester-Scotland to be moved back in to the XC franchise, that's why Bristol-Warrington-Scotland no longer exists as a direct route but Manchester-Bristol does instead.

 

[TheExmoorBeast]

Basingstoke to Brighton - always seemed packed when I used it, but SWT withdrew it as it wasn't in the new franchise, mind you the Basingstoke to Portsmouth replacement is also rather busy.

That's not a replacement! That service has been there all the time, it's the xx:09 from Waterloo - Portsmouth Harbour service.

I don't know why XC don't split the Bournemouth service, so one hour it goes as now to Bournemouth, the next it goes via Wokingham, Guildford & Havant to Southampton; It happens on weekends when the line via Mortimer is closed due to engineering work, so why not during the week as well? It opens up a whole host of new journey opportunities. XC are you listening?

 

[Invincibles]

Leicester to Manchester via Erewash line and avoiding Sheffield, stopping at Loughborough, East Midlands Parkway, Alfreton & Chesterfield

The London - Leicester - Manchester was a great train while it ran and it would be good to see it return in some form.

Even if it was Derby to Manchester that would be a start, getting from the East Midlands to Manchester is slower than it needs to be.

 

[Techniquest]

That's not a replacement! That service has been there all the time, it's the xx:09 from Waterloo - Portsmouth Harbour service.

I don't know why XC don't split the Bournemouth service, so one hour it goes as now to Bournemouth, the next it goes via Wokingham, Guildford & Havant to Southampton; It happens on weekends when the line via Mortimer is closed due to engineering work, so why not during the week as well? It opens up a whole host of new journey opportunities. XC are you listening?

Would this not add a considerably significant number of units to the amount required for a daily service? Something I sincerely doubt XC could manage daily. 2 Voyagers on each hourly service on just the Bournemouth route would tot up to a lot (I can't be bothered to do the mental arithmetic to work it out). Other reasons I can think of that would make it un-workable:

You've got the fact Reading to Southampton via Guildford takes a fair while. It would open up new journey opportunities, yes, but then you've got to get on SWT's good side and agree on access to their stations too. Guildford's doable when they're diverted as they have services originating/terminating there already.

Paths on the busy section from Havant to St Denys (where it gets even busier) and onto Southampton could be extremely difficult to find. Or you could get stuck behind a stopping service, which would of course add to the journey time significantly.

In times of disruption, the joining/dividing at Reading, which would already take up valuable space for a considerable time, would not be welcome. You could also have the Voyager get to Reading via the normal route some time before the one comes up from the Guildford direction if the service is disrupted on that route, which again would take up platform space that would be required for other services. Or the other way around for that matter.

The above are all reasons that come to mind as to why adding Reading to Guildford every hour, and re-instating Guildford to Havant to the XC network, is un-workable. Sorry!

 

[TheExmoorBeast]

Would this not add a considerably significant number of units to the amount required for a daily service? Something I sincerely doubt XC could manage daily. 2 Voyagers on each hourly service on just the Bournemouth route would tot up to a lot (I can't be bothered to do the mental arithmetic to work it out). Other reasons I can think of that would make it un-workable

You better tell DaFT that, they intend to get XC to run an extra service to Southampton soon.

You've got the fact Reading to Southampton via Guildford takes a fair while. It would open up new journey opportunities, yes, but then you've got to get on SWT's good side and agree on access to their stations too. Guildford's double when they're diverted as they have services originating/terminating there already.

When XC services are diverted via Guildford at the weekends they all go through to Bournemouth. It's not up to SWT to decide whether XC can go there or not, it's up to NR & if XC apply for the paths and they're agreed then there's not a lot SWT can do about it.

Yes it's a bloody nuisance when they're diverted via that way & longer, but it would be a useful extra revenue stream for XC who're in the financial dung!

Paths on the busy section from Havant to St Denys (where it gets even busier) and onto Southampton could be extremely difficult to find. Or you could get stuck behind a stopping service, which would of course add to the journey time significantly.

Kick Southern out of Southampton, their services across there are to say the least unreliable & utterly atrocious; They are regularly turned around at either Havant or Fareham to get it back towards London right time.

In times of disruption, the joining/dividing at Reading, which would already take up valuable space for a considerable time, would not be welcome. You could also have the Voyager get to Reading via the normal route some time before the one comes up from the Guildford direction if the service is disrupted on that route, which again would take up platform space that would be required for other services. Or the other way around for that matter.

They aren't going to divide the trains, they'd be merely extensions of the Newcastle - Reading services, which are pencilled in for extension to Southampton. If you watch the diverted weekend services they are "doubled" up and they run as either 8, 9 or 10 car formations.

The above are all reasons that come to mind as to why adding Reading to Guildford every hour, and re-instating Guildford to Havant to the XC network, is un-workable. Sorry!

I've just answered your questions why they can.

 

[tbtc]

This is a tough one, because you will generate a lot of largely idiosyncratic aspirations from us, most of which are probably not viable

Spot on; I confidently predict a lot of links between two random stations (with no evidence of a passenger flow between the two)...

However, I've a few wee suggestions:

1. Reading to Brighton. Either the old SWT way via Basingstoke or the FGW way via Reading. Doesn't even need to be frequent, but Reading is a big hub, and it would take a bit of traffic from Brighton that currently has to go through London to get anywhere

2. Edinburgh to Inverclyde/ Ayrshire. Would there be scope for a direct service a few times a day (e.g. link the DMU run Stranraer - Kilmarnock - Glasgow to the DMU run Glasgow - Shotts - Edinburgh?).

3. Edinburgh to the West Highlands (running a through service Waverley - Falkirk High - Queen Street - Oban?) - I appreciate that this is possible via the Sleeper, but there must be a daytime market for that.

Whilst the Welsh Assembly has meant services being diverted to Cardiff (e.g. the old Holyhead - Crewe and Liverpool - Cardiff are no more, but there are a lot of Holyhead - Cardiff trains), there's not been any trains linking Edinburgh (home of the Scottish Parliament) to previously unserved bits of Scotland (there is now one train a day on the recently opened Alloa branch, plus there will be direct trains to/from Airdrie etc come December)

4. Bradford to Morcambe. Morcambe used to be know as "Bradford On Sea". Whilst its not the attraction that it once was, I wonder whether diverting some of the Leeds - Morcambe services from/ to Bradford Foster Square instead would give a new market (okay, its possible to change at Shipley, but maybe not attractive for people with a lot of luggage)

5. Glasgow - Blackpool. TPE may be doing this once a week, but I think you could justify a much better service (especially, but not only, in the summer). Glaswegians are attracted to Blackpool like... (I'll let you fill in your own simile here)

6. Liverpool to North Wales. Similar to the Glasgow - Blackpool suggestion. North Wales seems full of Scousers, but there are no direct trains.

7. South Lanarkshire to Stirlingshire. There's a service from Motherwell to Cumbernauld, but the service from Cumbernauld to Falkirk Grahamston is the one from Queen Street. This seems strange to me as Glasgow to Falkirk is already well served by the Falkirk High service. Why not extend the Motherwell service to Falkirk instead, and provide a few links that avoid people having to go via Edinburgh/ Glasgow (e.g. this would allow people in Falkirk to change at Motherwell onto WCML services)? Future electrification would allow other routes like Glasgow - Hamilton - Motherwell - Coatbridge - Cumbernauld - Falkirk (which would give a few more "add on" links).

(that'll do for now - am trying to be realistic with routes where there seems to be some demand, rather than just give you a Fantasy List of places I'd like a service to from the town I live in now)

 

[Techniquest]

You better tell DaFT that, they intend to get XC to run an extra service to Southampton soon.

With what stock I wonder, considering they don't exactly have a lot of spare as it is. Also, do you have a source for this?

When XC services are diverted via Guildford at the weekends they all go through to Bournemouth. It's not up to SWT to decide whether XC can go there or not, it's up to NR & if XC apply for the paths and they're agreed then there's not a lot SWT can do about it.

I don't disagree that SWT can't really complain if the paths are agreed for them to go through there on diversions. It was raised somewhere, this thread or the other one, that the limited Southern/FGW services cannot call at Southampton Airport Parkway due to a lack of agreement with SWT on station access. Which is where my comment on having to get on SWT's good side with regards to having hourly XC services calling at Guildford and Havant.

Yes it's a bloody nuisance when they're diverted via that way & longer, but it would be a useful extra revenue stream for XC who're in the financial dung!

I'd like to see the Cost Benefit Analysis for that. I find it difficult to believe the extra costs and strain on an already tightly-used fleet of Voyagers and Super Voyagers would benefit XC in a significant enough way to make it profitable for them. They'd get a share of revenue from ORCATS between Guildford and Havant (if not Southampton), but would this be enough to make it worthwhile?

Kick Southern out of Southampton, their services across there are to say the least reliable & utterly atrocious; They are regularly turned around at either Havant or Fareham to get it back towards London right time.

I can't entirely comment fairly on that one, as I don't visit that part of the country and thus observe the Southern Southampton to London/Brighton workings often. However, they seem to work just fine when I've been either on them or awaiting their arrival at Southampton Central.

Also corrected your post in the above quote, as I don't think you meant to say "least unreliable"

They aren't going to divide the trains, they'd be merely extensions of the Newcastle - Reading services, which are pencilled in for extension to Southampton. If you watch the diverted weekend services they are "doubled" up and they run as either 8, 9 or 10 car formations.

Ah, I misunderstood that first part there previously.

I've not only seen the diverted weekend services, I did one of them in 2008 and had a pair of 220s from Reading to Southampton Central. Very odd to be cruising down the Portsmouth Direct on a 220! Although I'd still say it was more interesting than the 450s I got back from Havant to Guildford (with a short break at Haslemere to scoop the shack), good grief that was boring.

 

[swt_passenger]

That's not a replacement! That service has been there all the time, it's the xx:09 from Waterloo - Portsmouth Harbour service.

I think the previous poster might have been referring to the other peak only trains that currently run to or from Basingstoke, providing 'am up' and 'pm down' extras on the Portsmouth route, but they already ran anyway back when the SWT Brighton service was extant. The Reading or Basingstoke to Brighton didn't run hourly all day, it was diverted elsewhere in the peaks, eg to Southampton in the pm peak, when there are two Waterloo - Pompey via Basingstoke. Reading was very much an offpeak service, only 3 hourly anyway, and a couple of Fareham - Brighton legs were covered by FGW's services, hence those odd services that used to terminate/start at Fareham during the day.

SWT's 'Brighton service' was effectively an offpeak extension, it's arguable that the SN Southampton - Brighton hourly is a better use of west coastway capacity - and it runs every hour as well. I reckon if DfT had allocated it to SWT rather than SN it would have been just as successful though - and probably wouldn't have been seen as a cut...

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

With what stock I wonder, considering they don't exactly have a lot of spare as it is. Also, do you have a source for this?

It's in the recent GWML RUS, half of the Reading Newcastle service will be extended to Southampton only, ie 2 hourly. Would require one extra Voyager diagrammed on that route each day. [Based on an hour run in each direction, and the layover time at Reading being transferred to Southampton.]

No increase in the overall fleet should be needed, especially if they use an extra HST every day on the NE/SW route, AFAICT.

I don't disagree that SWT can't really complain if the paths are agreed for them to go through there on diversions. It was raised somewhere, this thread or the other one, that the limited Southern/FGW services cannot call at Southampton Airport Parkway due to a lack of agreement with SWT on station access.

Or until DfT decide it will happen, which it will from Dec this year - so SWT will have had their franchise revenue adjusted accordingly. SN will only run in one direction though, running via Eastleigh in both directions requires an extra unit as they only have about 15 mins at Southampton, and diverting takes about 10 mins in each direction.

 

[thefab444]

When XC divert via Guildford they only run 1tp2h to Bournemouth, so can afford to run double units. However, I'm pretty sure the last few times they've done that diversion they've just used single units. :roll:

Southern are somewhat unreliable out of Southampton, most of the time it works well enough, but as soon as someone breathes in Chichester everything to/from Southampton will get canned. Bit tough on people using Southern Only tickets unless SWT accept these during disruption?

Personally, I think it would be better if they extended the Victoria - Southampton services on to Bournemouth, or Poole, calling at Totton, (in an ideal world, Ashurst ) Brockenhurst, New Milton and Christchurch, which would give them a much more decent turnaround time (about 30 minutes instead of 10 - 15). Of course, that would require a couple of extra units.

 

[wintonian]

The Victoria - Gatwick - Southampton services used to start from Bournemouth using the almost? redundant platform 1.

I seem to remember that when Virgin brought in the Voyagers we were promised 8 car double units and were told the 4 car sets were only temporary until the rest were built.

It used to be such a pleasant journey from Bournemouth heading up north on a non-overcrowded HST.

 

[thefab444]

Yes, they ran to Bournemouth until 2003. Part of the problem was they only served Brockenhurst, although one or two services called at New Milton and Christchurch in the peak periods, so weren't much use as a Dorset/West Hampshire - Sussex link.

There also used to be a daily return stopping service from Poole to Portsmouth operated by SWT which was cut around 2002 - 2003.

 

[wintonian]

I think it was only 1 a day from New Milton anyway in the morning peak.

Strangely I don't remember the Portsmouth service, what time of day did that run?

 

[me123]

7. South Lanarkshire to Stirlingshire. There's a service from Motherwell to Cumbernauld, but the service from Cumbernauld to Falkirk Grahamston is the one from Queen Street. This seems strange to me as Glasgow to Falkirk is already well served by the Falkirk High service. Why not extend the Motherwell service to Falkirk instead, and provide a few links that avoid people having to go via Edinburgh/ Glasgow (e.g. this would allow people in Falkirk to change at Motherwell onto WCML services)? Future electrification would allow other routes like Glasgow - Hamilton - Motherwell - Coatbridge - Cumbernauld - Falkirk (which would give a few more "add on" links).

Realistically, I can see a Motherwell-Stirling service proving more popular than a Motherwell-Falkirk service.

Coatbridge will soon both have a direct link to Edinburgh (Coatbridge-Airdrie-Bathgate-Edinburgh), and Motherwell currently has one as well. Without Airdrie-Bathgate, Coatbridge-Falkirk-Edinburgh would have actually been a very competitive route. As it stands, the route is not competitive due to a 40 minute connection in Cumbernauld in one direction. I think this would be the main benefit of a direct train, and to be honest I don't think it's needed.

On the other hand, the Stirling service would probably benefit more people, as Stirling is a bigger city and has better onward travel connections to the North. And, with good timing, you could have a ten minute connection onto the Glasgow-Falkirk Grahamston service, so that passengers can still benefit from a competitive rail service to Falkirk.

Another route I would like to reinstate is Coatbridge - Hamilton. OK, we have a few services in the peaks. But they're poorly advertised and, frankly, useless. It would be nice to see a more regular service on this route once again, to link the two towns.

---

EDIT: Another one I'd like is Glasgow-Dunfermline via Stirling and Alloa. It would require some upgrade works to the SAK line (such as more passing loops, and perhaps a new station or two at Clackmannan and/or Kincardine), and maybe an upgrade at Dunfermline town depending on the timetabling. But it would have the benefits of linking Glasgow and Fife with a regular hourly service, linking Stirling and Fife with the aforementioned service, and reintroducing Clackmannan and Kincardine back into the rail network, with minimal additional costs.

I know I've focussed on Scottish improvements above, but I'm sure there's plenty of deserving projects South of the border as well; I'm just not qualified to discuss them.

 

[TheExmoorBeast]

They'll only be in the way & they were just as pathetic & unreliable then as they are now and they only go to Southampton! Thank God that they don't come down here.

The nearest we have to them is ATW and having experienced their services in the last week (1x excellent & 4x abysmal), they should have their services examined for poor running & poor reliability. I can quite happily say that FGW is now really getting there & SWT are damned good too (apart from the wretched announcements!).

Southern should be kept on the Coastway line to Portsmouth and no further as they cannot do the service properly.

 

[43106]

I'd like to see...
1) some XC Reading terminators extended to Paddington, Brighton (via Kensington O, East Croydon & Gatwick) and Portsmouth (via Guildford & Haslemere),
2) XC services from Birmingham to Manchester should be extended to Preston & beyond,
3) re-introduction of WCML services between Euston &/or Birmingham and Perth (& beyond), avoiding Glasgow and Edinburgh, replicating the old 'Clansman',
4) Euston - Preston - Lancaster services should go to Blackpool instead. IF the Con(lib)dem cuts DON'T affect the proposed electrification of Blackpool, this is perfectly feasible,
5) Milford Haven + Fishguard + Pembroke - Paddington services, M-F. There is a Pembroke - Paddington SO service, but I reckon there is some justification to make it M-F as well.

 

[tbtc]

Realistically, I can see a Motherwell-Stirling service proving more popular than a Motherwell-Falkirk service.

Coatbridge will soon both have a direct link to Edinburgh (Coatbridge-Airdrie-Bathgate-Edinburgh), and Motherwell currently has one as well. Without Airdrie-Bathgate, Coatbridge-Falkirk-Edinburgh would have actually been a very competitive route. As it stands, the route is not competitive due to a 40 minute connection in Cumbernauld in one direction. I think this would be the main benefit of a direct train, and to be honest I don't think it's needed.

On the other hand, the Stirling service would probably benefit more people, as Stirling is a bigger city and has better onward travel connections to the North. And, with good timing, you could have a ten minute connection onto the Glasgow-Falkirk Grahamston service, so that passengers can still benefit from a competitive rail service to Falkirk

Ideally, yes, I was just thinking about existing units/ paths (so no new trains were needed). With a blank sheet of paper, then a half hourly Hamilton - Cumbernauld service, extending hourly to Falkirk/ Stirling becomes a good idea. Stirling would be a good place to connect for Dundee etc, which opens Lanarkshire up to more places (avoiding having to go into Glasgow). But then, in an ideal world, you could extend the Falkirk service to Fife (avoiding the need to travel into Edinburgh for those kind of journeys)

 

[TheExmoorBeast]

I think that XC are missing out at Portsmouth with the Naval base there, a call at North Camp at the weekends could be advantageous as well for army personnel based in nearby Aldershot garrison. You only need to see how busy things get down here when a ship returns. Shheesh!

 

[route:oxford]

Realistically, I can see a Motherwell-Stirling service proving more popular than a Motherwell-Falkirk service.

Make that a Perth/Dunblane (or even Alloa) route to Carlisle via Cumbernauld & Motherwell.

Perth xx.00
Dunblane xx.26
Stirling xx.34
Larbert xx.41
Cumbernauld xx.54
Motherwell x1.16
Lockerbie x1.56
Carlisle x2.23

Would be fantastic for anyone from central Scotland heading to London/Brum.

Potential for 4h30m From Stirling to Brum or 5h10m to Euston with a change at Carlisle.

And sadly unlikely to happen unless an entrepreneur with deep pockets funds some new build 221s or 390s (to release existing 221s)

(Although I've always thought it a shame that Ms Gloag or Mr Souter hasn't booked in a once-weekly vanity diagram of a Voyager to Perth)

Another one I'd like is Glasgow-Dunfermline via Stirling and Alloa. It would require some upgrade works to the SAK line (such as more passing loops, and perhaps a new station or two at Clackmannan and/or Kincardine), and maybe an upgrade at Dunfermline town depending on the timetabling. But it would have the benefits of linking Glasgow and Fife with a regular hourly service, linking Stirling and Fife with the aforementioned service, and reintroducing Clackmannan and Kincardine back into the rail network, with minimal additional costs.

Glasgow to Glasgow via Stirling, Dunfermline & Perth.

 

[wintonian]

I think that XC are missing out at Portsmouth with the Naval base there, a call at North Camp at the weekends could be advantageous as well for army personnel based in nearby Aldershot garrison. You only need to see how busy things get down here when a ship returns. Shheesh!

And there’s still some cross channel ferry’s operating out of Pompy that are happy to take foot passengers.

 

[thefab444]

You only need to see how busy things get down here when a ship returns

Ah yes, the renowned Taunton naval base?

 

[TheExmoorBeast]

Ah I wondered how long it would be before sarcasm reared its ugly head! :roll:

Actually Taunton does have a military base.
It's at Pen Elm, between Norton Fitzwarren & Bishops Lydeard.

 

[thefab444]

Actually Taunton does have a military base.

How does the ship get there? On a lorry?