ORR Refuses LM Preston Service

[WestCoast]

I find it hard to feel sorry for the people of Preston when there are so many bigger places with poorer services.

It's not just about 'the people of Preston' - as I mentioned before Preston is a major connection point for services from the Fylde lines, Ormskirk line and East Lancs line, with two of them serving very significant population centres.

If stations were in relation to population in of the town/city the station served, Crewe would not be the size it is!

 

[Whistler40145]

As the proposed LM service has been thrown out, would it not make more sense to extend several Euston to Wolverhampton services through to Glasgow/Edinburgh using paths currently used by the Birmingham NS to Glasgow Central/Edinburgh Waverley services?


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?hjftkd

 

[atillathehunn]

The LM service.
My point is - were this service created, it would be using a unit and staff, every hour of the day that could otherwise be deployed on another route. Ok, if this route is the best use of that stock/staff and is profitable, then you win. My guess is it probably isn't, and it's just a bit frustrating that half of these 'new service' threads revolve around suggestions beneficial to the member posting for one reason or another (be they students, commuters, whatever), conveniently running through their home town/village, with no real appreciation for the complex logistical and financial backdrop.

I can hazard a guess here that nothing I say on this forum is going to influence the decision of London Midland, or for that matter anything I say anywhere.
With that in mind, I can assume that London Midland have done some more research into why that particular service (Birmingham to Preston stopper) is going to be profitable for them and worthwhile in terms of capital outlay (use of staff and unit).
I did not suggest that LM stop their train at Hartford. London Midland suggested that they stop their train at Hartford. Somewhere in the email archive I have an official reply from London Midland from when I enquired about the timetable change proposals that were pinned up in the Hartford station booking office in which they say they are (were) planning to stop this altered train at Hartford!

I fail to see why my comments are met with such derision!

 

[VTPreston_Tez]

I would like to see London services serving Hartford once more, shame they shortened the platforms a couple of years ago, they shaved ~40m off IIRC, so that might rule out 9-car 390s calling there.

So long as it's not every single Virgin! Maybe just 1pd BHM, 1pd EUS and 1pd that serves both (2 to GLC, 1 to EDB)

 

[Whistler40145]

Wasn't Hartford removed as a Virgin stop so that faster services could run?


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?rv0nse

 

[atillathehunn]

So long as it's not every single Virgin! Maybe just 1pd BHM, 1pd EUS and 1pd that serves both (2 to GLC, 1 to EDB)

It doesn't even need that! It's just as quick to get to Euston by getting the train to Crewe and hopping onto the next Virgin service heading to London which (last time I took it) took 1hr30 dead, giving an overall journey time of 2hrs on the dot. What this area is lacking is a northbound train to Warrington and Preston which would give commuter services and connection to trains to Scotland etc.

 

[calc7]

I can hazard a guess here that nothing I say on this forum is going to influence the decision of London Midland, or for that matter anything I say anywhere.
With that in mind, I can assume that London Midland have done some more research into why that particular service (Birmingham to Preston stopper) is going to be profitable for them and worthwhile in terms of capital outlay (use of staff and unit).
I did not suggest that LM stop their train at Hartford. London Midland suggested that they stop their train at Hartford. Somewhere in the email archive I have an official reply from London Midland from when I enquired about the timetable change proposals that were pinned up in the Hartford station booking office in which they say they are (were) planning to stop this altered train at Hartford!

I fail to see why my comments are met with such derision!

Maybe so, but times have changed since the original analysis was done. You even admit you will only need it a few times a year, probably at dirt-cheap SSR prices:

I would appreciate the London train, as I am time rich and money poor and it's ideal for getting me to St Pancras for the Eurostar to university.

Whilst I appreciate your analysis and intention is very genuine, I read your post in much the same light as the guy who wanted a direct Cardiff to Blackpool service just because it would make visiting his girlfriend once a month easier. :roll: It is this movement from the particular to the general that makes some posts very frustrating to read.

 

[atillathehunn]

Maybe so, but times have changed since the original analysis was done. You even admit you will only need it a few times a year, probably at dirt-cheap SSR prices:



Whilst I appreciate your analysis and intention is very genuine, I read your post in much the same light as the guy who wanted a direct Cardiff to Blackpool service just because it would make visiting his girlfriend once a month easier. :roll: It is this movement from the particular to the general that makes some posts very frustrating to read.

The population of Hartford and the region is only increasing, which, it might well be assumed, leads to greater demands for journeys.

I have made clear in a post buried somewhere that the Euston train is probably of negligible value. Nice though it would be for those lazy summer days when a day trip to London on a cheap ticket is attractive but otherwise reasonably useless. The lasting analysis, and analysis which I am confident of being grounded in fact is that a connection north to stations like Warrington/Preston for the towns themselves and for the connections would be of great value.
I would be the first to say that this idea of every station needing a through train to everywhere is completely ridiculous. If we're going down that route, I want a train that takes me from Hartford and drops me off at Maastricht Randwijck with no changes. I think a hub and spoke system is by far and a way the best system. But it's let down by poor connections, and an ideal example is the lack of northbound connections from a large-ish area like Weaver Vale.

 

[tbtc]

It's not just about 'the people of Preston' - as I mentioned before Preston is a major connection point for services from the Fylde lines, Ormskirk line and East Lancs line, with two of them serving very significant population centres.

If stations were in relation to population in of the town/city the station served, Crewe would not be the size it is!

Put it this way - Preston has four trains an hour to Manchester (Blackpool has two trains an hour, Blackburn has one train an hour, Burnley has none), Preston has an hourly service to London (Blackpool, Blackburn and Burnley have none), Preston has a couple of trains most hours to Scotland, an hourly Birmingham service etc.

I'm certainly not arguing that these services be reduced whatsoever, but its hard to agree with locals who complain that Preston gets a raw deal. Everyone thinks that their local town gets a raw deal, sure, but some people make a more compelling case than others.

II can assume that London Midland have done some more research into why that particular service (Birmingham to Preston stopper) is going to be profitable for them and worthwhile in terms of capital outlay (use of staff and unit)

A cynic would suggest that London Midland's research goes along the lines of spotting that Virgin carry a lot of passengers on their hourly service from Preston to Wigan/ Warrington/ Crewe/ Birmingham, and that changing the services would give LM a significant share of that ORCATS pot (whilst retaining 99% of the Liverpool - Birmingham service, despite cutting that frequency in half).

Does anyone think that Preston needs twice the number of services to Birmingham that Liverpool gets?

 

[Whistler40145]

Will the re-routing of Manchester Airport to Glasgow/Edinburgh cause any potential pathing problems in the Wigan area?


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?400v13

 

[tbtc]

The population of Hartford and the region is only increasing, which, it might well be assumed, leads to greater demands for journeys

The population of almost every city/ town/ village/ hamlet is increasing though - that's not unique to a Cheshire village with 5,000 people.

 

[atillathehunn]

A cynic would suggest that London Midland's research goes along the lines of spotting that Virgin carry a lot of passengers on their hourly service from Preston to Wigan/ Warrington/ Crewe/ Birmingham, and that changing the services would give LM a significant share of that ORCATS pot (whilst retaining 99% of the Liverpool - Birmingham service, despite cutting that frequency in half).

Does anyone think that Preston needs twice the number of services to Birmingham that Liverpool gets?

A cynic certainly could suggest that, and I'm not in a position to comment on the validity of your statement.
I don't think anyone could suggest that Preston needs that number of trains, however it's a convenient terminating point and so I suggest your comment is slightly facetious.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The population of almost every city/ town/ village/ hamlet is increasing though - that's not unique to a Cheshire village with 5,000 people.

I refer you to the representations of Mike Hall (then M.P. for Vale Royal) in the Commons, where he states that the catchment area of Hartford station is in fact 120, 000.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmhansrd/vo040317/halltext/40317h05.htm

 

[D1009]

Wasn't Hartford removed as a Virgin stop so that faster services could run?

Absolutely. Hartford use to have a 2 hrly class 50 hauled sevice to Carlisle in the 1970s prior to electrification as well as the Liverpool stoppers, but the WCML was nowhere near as busy then and it was 100 mph tops. If you want fast trains you can't put slow ones in their way. I can't see Hartford getting more than 1 tph now, wherever they go, and Liverpool seems the obvious northerly destination.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Will the re-routing of Manchester Airport to Glasgow/Edinburgh cause any potential pathing problems in the Wigan area?


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?400v13

I doubt it as all the voyagers and most of the pendos call at Wigan, so there won't be much difference in overall times.

 

[Eagle]

Does anyone think that Preston needs twice the number of services to Birmingham that Liverpool gets?

No, but the line between Crewe/Warrington and Preston does need significantly more than 2tph (one of which doesn't call Crewe). And that's the main point of this service. Not providing more trains to Birmingham.

 

[Whistler40145]

Would it be likely in the future that the current 2 track section north of Winsford be converted to 4 track through to Preston?


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?g5b1db

 

[atillathehunn]

Would it be likely in the future that the current 2 track section north of Winsford be converted to 4 track through to Preston?


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?g5b1db

Unlikely - there's the two viaducts over the river Weaver, and Hartford station is in quite a considerable cutting.
It goes to four track for a brief period at Hartford CLC junction and then back to twin track.

 

[sprinterguy]

Would it be likely in the future that the current 2 track section north of Winsford be converted to 4 track through to Preston?

The currently two track section between Wigan and Euxton Balshaw Lane used to be four track prior to electrification north of Weaver Junction in 1973 so that would probably be the easiest (comparatively) section to instate.

The possibility of four tracking gets progressively smaller as you head south from Wigan. It might be vaguely possible with massively prohibitive expenditure for a continuous run of four track main line between Warrington and Wigan (given that a lot of that section of route already is 4 track) but between Winsford and Warrington it would be nigh on impossible for a number of constraining reasons: Principle among these being the issues of the Vale Royal and Dutton viaducts which are located on the Winsford - Hartford and Acton Bridge - Warrington sections respectively.

 

[Whistler40145]

I can imagine the cost of building viaducts in the Weaver Junction to Winsford area to be extortionate.


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?ablbu5

 

[northwichcat]

VT can also run into Leyland and Euxton Balshaw Lane in times of severe disruption too, not just a local operator.

Bit of an issue with platform lengths when Pendolinos and doubled up Voyagers are used.

 

[Whistler40145]

Why isn't there a system whereby two operators could share stock & services? i.e. LM operate a Euston to Birmingham service with a 350, Virgin could then operate north to Glasgow/Edinburgh with same stock & staff.


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?ovgeth

 

[northwichcat]

If you want fast trains you can't put slow ones in their way.

Yes let's have all express services and no local trains providing connections to them. :roll:

Unlikely - there's the two viaducts over the river Weaver, and Hartford station is in quite a considerable cutting.
It goes to four track for a brief period at Hartford CLC junction and then back to twin track.

It would be much easier to double track the freight only Middlewich branch line and electrify Sandbach-Northwich-Weaver Junction. Work carried out on the Leftwich viaduct by Network Rail found the speed could be raised to 50mph for everything except Pacers, however, it's never been implemented as 50% of the trains running between Northwich and Greenbank are Pacers so would be restricted to 20mph anyway.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why isn't there a system whereby two operators could share stock & services?

Do you mean like existed between FNW and ATW after Manchester-Llandudno was handed to ATW which could see ATW crews and stock working FNW services between Manchester and Chester via Altrincham and FNW crews and stock working ATW services between Manchester and Chester via Warrington?

Or like the 350 operated services pre-LM franchise where they were a Central service north of Rugby and a Silverlink service south of Rugby?

 

[Eagle]

Or like the 350 operated services pre-LM franchise where they were a Central service north of Rugby and a Silverlink service south of Rugby?

Or like the Scotrail/Northern services from Glasgow to Newcastle? Or the FCC/Southern Sevenoaks services? Or Heathrow Connect?

 

[Whistler40145]

Yes, just have a fleet of 350s in a common user pool with LM crews to Birmingham & Virgin crews to Scotland.

Only the Euston to Glasgow services need to be Pendolinos.

Any spare Pendolinos are then available for e.g. Blackpool to Euston or others currently operated by Voyagers.

---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?vq405q

 

[Eagle]

Only the Euston to Glasgow services need to be Pendolinos.

I disagree; the Birmingham to Scotland services at times do need to be worked by a 390 or (even better) 2×221. A 350 on its own wouldn't cope; two could just about manage (although four and a half hours on one? no thanks).

 

[D1009]

I disagree; the Birmingham to Scotland services at times do need to be worked by a 390 or (even better) 2×221. A 350 on its own wouldn't cope; two could just about manage (although four and a half hours on one? no thanks).

Am I right in thinking that a 390 doesn't have many more standard class seats than a 221 ?

 

[Whistler40145]

Which section of the route sees the most passengers?

If it was run with 350s, why not time the Birmingham to Scotland service to attach to the service from Manchester Airport @ Preston then run as one service?


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?bcf3fc

 

[Eagle]

Which section of the route sees the most passengers?

Crewe to Preston.

 

[D1009]

Yes let's have all express services and no local trains providing connections to them.

Yes there are many reasonably sized settlements along high speed routes which are not rail served. Bawtry and Royal Wootton Bassett come immediately to mind.

Hartford might be sorted after HS1 if you're lucky.

 

[Whistler40145]

Would it be impossible for it to be run as 2x350 Birmingham to Preston & 3x350 north of Preston?


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?0g0b0g

 

[johnnychips]

Yes there are many reasonably sized settlements along high speed routes which are not rail served. Bawtry and Royal Wootton Bassett come immediately to mind.

Same area on ECML - Rossington and Tuxford.