Transport for Wales - Stafford

[MarkWi72]

Couldn’t they incorporate Brum - Stoke - Crewe trains via Rugeley?

 

[Watershed]

Couldn’t they incorporate Brum - Stoke - Crewe trains via Rugeley?

Theoretically yes, however firstly that would introduce a huge number of disruptive crossing moves (once at Rugeley North Jn, then again at Colwich Jn, then again at Milford, Stafford or Norton Bridge).

Secondly, you would need some other service to serve the new Willenhall and Darlaston stations (though personally I think this has merit in its own right).

Furthermore, it would even further degrade the service between Kidsgrove/Stoke/Stone etc. to Birmingham to such a degree that it would be completely uncompetitive with driving. It's already become quite a bit slower through the diversion of the service via Bescot, it doesn't need to be even slower.

And finally and perhaps most importantly, the Rugeley line is already busy enough as it is at peak times - almost all of the platforms are too short for any longer formations, so there would be real issues with capacity for Stone/Stoke etc. passengers northbound or Rugeley/Hednesford/Walsall passengers southbound.

 

[The Planner]

Couldn’t they incorporate Brum - Stoke - Crewe trains via Rugeley?

Too long and too slow. It was cleared for Pendos when it was wired as a diversionary route but you'll never see one along there for the same reason.

 

[MarkWi72]

Ah, I did wonder about conflicts, but I thought the route could be manipulated at times when this could lessen. It probably would be too slow, thinking about it. My plan would be to use Colwich and avoid the double track sections at Milford/Shugborough and Stafford itself. Or is there too much conflict with Euston - Manchester trains? But as you point out there are other factors at play.

As for Darlaston and Willenhall, why not loop Wolves -Brum stopping trains in a sort of circuit so they serve all Grand Junction and Stour Valley stations? Is this viable?

 

[Watershed]

Ah, I did wonder about conflicts, but I thought the route could be manipulated at times when this could lessen. It probably would be too slow, thinking about it. My plan would be to use Colwich and avoid the double track sections at Milford/Shugborough and Stafford itself. Or is there too much conflict with Euston - Manchester trains? But as you point out there are other factors at play.

There would probably be ways and means of fitting it in, but it would still represent a considerable performance risk. And I couldn't say off the top of my head whether it would work at Rugeley/Colwich given the current Chase line paths (which are largely set in stone in/out of New St).

Of course by avoiding Stafford you would avoid both a major traffic source as well as interchange point - it's often the quickest station to change at for people travelling from Kidsgrove/Stoke/Stone to the south or north. Whereas Rugeley otherwise just sees the semifast London service, so that would give a much more limited set of connections.

As for Darlaston and Willenhall, why not loop Wolves -Brum stopping trains in a sort of circuit so they serve all Grand Junction and Stour Valley stations? Is this viable?

What exactly did you have in mind? At the moment the stoppers continue on to Walsall as a sort of "U". That cross-New St connectivity probably has some value which I don't think it would be good to scrap.

Unfortunately the junctions at Walsall and Wolverhampton face the wrong way to lend themselves to a through service from Birmingham. You'd have to reverse at either end, increasing journey times. At Wolves in particular it would potentially be quite problematic in terms of conflicts.

 

[MarkWi72]

I was thinking to miss out Walsall ( which could be served by trains to Rugeley and/or shuttle? ) and send trains in a loop. I’m thinking the only conflict potential would be at Wolverhampton crossing to the Grand Junction spur at Crane St to Portobello Jn.

 

[Watershed]

I was thinking to miss out Walsall ( which could be served by trains to Rugeley and/or shuttle? ) and send trains in a loop. I’m thinking the only conflict potential would be at Wolverhampton crossing to the Grand Junction spur at Crane St to Portobello Jn.

I think that would be very unpopular with the residents of Walsall! But as you can see, there are no easy options, because of the way that the junctions face and where the stations are.

 

[MarkWi72]

I think that would be very unpopular with the residents of Walsall! But as you can see, there are no easy options, because of the way that the junctions face and where the stations are.

No it is difficult. Just throwing out ideas here and asking if they're viable.