Sheffield - York

[YorkshireBear]

I am referring to Northern parlimentary service via pontefract baghill. At moment it goes sheffield-Meadowhall-Rotherham-Swinton-moorthorpe-Pontefract-sherburn-church fenton-ulleskelf-york in 1hr 23mins.

anyone who know this area or route, would it not make sense to transfer the service to a 158 (or similar) remove some fo the uneccesary stops (particularly rotherham central and swinton. Does anyone know how much the 3 stops between pontefract and york are used and as to whether any of them could be cut?

why not make it a slightly more regular (6 a day) make it a semi fast express service which could start to provide a competitor to XC services (in particular the service via leeds) giving meadowhall a direct link with york sheffield a direct link with pontefract and a less crowded alternative to sheffield york?

So then being Sheffield Meadowhall Moorthorpe? Pontefract sherburn? Church fenton? Ulleskelf? york

all those with ? are what id like information on as i dont really know.

was just something i thought about when i watched it stop at swinton with 4 people on.

 

[caughtonatrain]

I occasionally take this service between Sheffield in York - indeed, whenever I can. It's good for avoiding the horrible passenger environment that is a Voyager. It goes through some interesting rural and industrial landscapes. And 1h23's not too bad.

I didn't realise that it was a "parliamentary" service. Sure, it's not frequent but doesn't a parliamentary service only call once a day or even once a week?

I would imagine that the minor halts are pretty convenient for small rural communities that they serve, and are only a minor inconvenience for the few through passengers that there are. Whenever I'm on one of these trains, usually mid morning or mid afternoon I think, they're never full but are usually well used.

There is a lot of scope (without knowing the specifics) for increasing the frequency and quality of rail connections around this part of the world, IMHO. I've often thought that places like Castleford, Pontefract, etc are very substantial towns close to many major cities, yet their stations and the services that serve them seem to leave a lot to be desired.

 

[yorkie]

The purpose is not to provide a fast link from Sheffield to York, but to provide a service for places like Pontefract, Sherburn etc. It also supplements journey opportunities for SYPTE and I would imagine that cutting stops at Rotherham would make the train cost even more to run as it would lose ORCATS revenue and SYPTE funding!

Basically your proposal is incompatible with the purpose of this service.

 

[YorkshireBear]

see your point there hadn't taken that into consideration, was only an idea thanks for setting me straight.

could it not be added to current service then... as completely seperate.

 

[The Snap]

The purpose is not to provide a fast link from Sheffield to York, but to provide a service for places like Pontefract, Sherburn etc. It also supplements journey opportunities for SYPTE and I would imagine that cutting stops at Rotherham would make the train cost even more to run as it would lose ORCATS revenue and SYPTE funding!

Basically your proposal is incompatible with the purpose of this service.

Plus, isn't the whole point of a Parliamentary service to stick to the initial booked stops that were outlined when it was introduced? If you changed the stopping pattern to something contrary to what was set out on it’s introduction by Parliament, wouldn't it no longer be classified as the same Parliamentary service, and thus not be a Parliamentary service at all? Hence, that defeats the point of running it!

 

[ainsworth74]

Plus, isn't the whole point of a Parliamentary service to stick to the initial booked stops that were outlined when it was introduced?

I'm not convinced it is a Parliamentary service. There are two returns journeys 7 days a week that use this route, a Parliamentary service would have perhaps one or two a week in maybe one direction not 28 journeys in total between Sheffield and York!

 

[The Snap]

I'm not convinced it is a Parliamentary service. There are two returns journeys 7 days a week that use this route, a Parliamentary service would have perhaps one or two a week in maybe one direction not 28 journeys in total between Sheffield and York!

Good point!

An example of a proper Parliamentary service would be Stockport to Stalybridge via Denton, which operates once a week on a Saturday morning in one direction only.

 

[brompton rail]

The twice daily Sheffield /York stopping service operated by Northern is part of their Franchise. There are no such things as Parliamentary services, as Parliament does not lay down the terms of the Franchise, the ORR and DfT do.

XCs services between these 2 cities (via Leeds or Doncaster) are also a part of their franchise commitment.

To change the stopping pattern operators need agreement from the DfT.

As previously remarked the purpose of the Northern trains is to serve the intermediate stations, since XC trains provide a frequent and faster service. And, yes, a mini bus replacement would carry empty seats.

 

[YorkshireBear]

i read somewhere it was a parlimentary service i doubted it myself.

 

[tbtc]

I'm not convinced it is a Parliamentary service. There are two returns journeys 7 days a week that use this route, a Parliamentary service would have perhaps one or two a week in maybe one direction not 28 journeys in total between Sheffield and York!

True!

It's basically an offpeak use of a unit that would otherwise sit empty between rush hour duties. It's never going to compete well against the Cross Country service (much as enthusiasts dislike Voyagers, I think most normal people would prefer them to an hour trip on a Pacer), so might as well stop at Rotherham/ Swinton etc

Rather than dedicate another unit to it all day long, I'd rather Northern concentrated any "spare" stock on beefing up the already busy services it runs elsewhere

 

[Greenback]

The purpose is not to provide a fast link from Sheffield to York, but to provide a service for places like Pontefract, Sherburn etc. It also supplements journey opportunities for SYPTE and I would imagine that cutting stops at Rotherham would make the train cost even more to run as it would lose ORCATS revenue and SYPTE funding!

Basically your proposal is incompatible with the purpose of this service.

Spot on. A lot of people seem to forget that stops at intermediate stations are often vital for the people living in those communities.

 

[First class]

AFAIK, the least frequent train service on the network is Chester-Runcorn which sees only 10 trains a year, in one direction only.

 

[yorkie]

i read somewhere it was a parlimentary service i doubted it myself.

How do you define 'parliamentary service'?

If it is defined as operating at the minimum frequency possible in order to comply with acts of parliament, ie once per week, then it isn't one. That said, don't people call once-per-day services 'parliamentary services'?