Trivia-Services that could be combined to make a new through service

[Falcon1200]

think GWR have done that already Hereford-Worcester-Paddington?

You missed out Oxford !

I can't really get excited about through services which involve a reversal in a terminal station such as Ayr to Edinburgh via Glasgow Central, as you still end up with a long dwell at the station. It is also awkward to timetable.

Through services such as some of those suggested are an operational nightmare, because unless Traincrew work throughout, any delay or disruption causes the service to fall apart and spreads chaos throughout the network. In some places it is unavoidable, eg Thameslink and the Glasgow Central and Queen St Low Level routes, and of course benefits those wishing to cross the city concerned, but that is a minority of passengers.

 

[Basil Jet]

I can't really get excited about through services which involve a reversal in a terminal station such as Ayr to Edinburgh via Glasgow Central, as you still end up with a long dwell at the station. It is also awkward to timetable.

So do you think Sheringham - Cromer and Cromer - Norwich should be separate services? And Colchester - Colchester Town and Colchester Town - Walton?

 

[JonathanH]

So do you think Sheringham - Cromer and Cromer - Norwich should be separate services? And Colchester - Colchester Town and Colchester Town - Walton?

Reversal in a single platform on a single track branchline is somewhat different from reversal in a large terminal stations.

But yes, I do sometimes wonder whether reversal at Bradford Interchange is worth all the conflicting moves it involves.

The Cleethorpes to Manchester Airport via Manchester Piccadilly service was singled out as being a nuisance to schedule when they were last considering timetable changes in Manchester.

 

[YorksLad12]

But yes, I do sometimes wonder whether reversal at Bradford Interchange is worth all the conflicting moves it involves.

Ignoring, for the moment, that there's no other way to do it without building a new station... I think it is. All of the trains from Bradford are going either to Halifax or Leeds, so it's simpler than the situation used to be at Piccadilly, for example.

 

[NSE]

They do announce on board that the train continues to Central London via Mitcham Junction or Wimbledon (as appropriate) and the PIS on the loop show that. At least the ex-Thameslink ones at South Merton do. The Carshalton/Hackbridge side ones may be different.

The only thing I would adjust would be once the service has arrived on its own side of the loop, I would continue to move the destination on a station. I.e, once it’s quicker to carry round the loop. So at South Merton it shows Sutton, then Morden South it shows Carshalton, St Helier shows Hackbridge and so on. Similar to how SWR do theirs. I only add this as I arrived at Wimbledon and my companion was heading to Mitcham Junction. On finding out the tram wasn’t running they assumed they’d have to bus it until I explained the Sutton service would continue as it does.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Paddington - Exeter (semifast) and Exeter - Penzance

A more frequent service from London to Plymouth and Penzance

Which Exeter to Penzance services are you referring to? Apart from a very early service at 06.25 from Exeter I can’t see any services starting at Exeter heading to Penzance they all originate at stations further afield?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Reversal in a single platform on a single track branchline is somewhat different from reversal in a large terminal stations.

But yes, I do sometimes wonder whether reversal at Bradford Interchange is worth all the conflicting moves it involves.

The Cleethorpes to Manchester Airport via Manchester Piccadilly service was singled out as being a nuisance to schedule when they were last considering timetable changes in Manchester.

If instead of running through services with a reversal at Bradford Interchange, you terminated everything there and ran separate Leeds and Manchester services, I'm not sure what problem you're solving other than "reversal anxiety".

You might gain a bit of capacity in the throat, but at the loss of through journeys which are important to many people. You say that reversals incur extended dwells, but forcing everyone to change will extend those dwells for through passengers, not shorten them. Trains can easily do the reversal at Bradford within 5-6 minutes, which is a longer dwell than a through station but not so long that it desperately needs fixing.

You also wouldn't actually get rid of conflicts entirely, as trains over a certain length can only use the platforms on one side of the station anyway.

These ideas are a bit like "Bradford Crossrail" in that they're driven by making maps look neat, not on what works for the majority of passengers.

 

[zwk500]

You might gain a bit of capacity in the throat, but at the loss of through journeys which are important to many people. You say that reversals incur extended dwells, but forcing everyone to change will extend those dwells for through passengers, not shorten them. Trains can easily do the reversal at Bradford within 5-6 minutes, which is a longer dwell than a through station but not so long that it desperately needs fixing.

Also, at somewhere like Bradford the dwell time would probably be 2/3 minutes anyway, so it's even less of a saving

These ideas are a bit like "Bradford Crossrail" in that they're driven by making maps look neat, not on what works for the majority of passengers.

This

 

[SWTurbo]

this isnt plausible. Its been looked into many, many times.

Just digging up an old one here, what sort of pathing capacity does the Melksham single have? The 'Sham Shuttle is 2 hourly, so surely there may be some capacity between the freight? The Salisbury-Westbury run would certainly benefit from 2tph at least Soton-Bris, certainly in the peak and summer even if only extending to bristol vice swindon?

 

[dciuk]

London to Leeds and Leeds to Carlisle

Surprised no one has mentioned Barnstaple to Exeter and Exeter to Waterloo (Personally I think it should be kept separate as with so many single track sections it could cause more delays if run as a single service)

 

[PGAT]

This is not a joke.

There is literally no reason why these trains should be separate services in the timetable rather than one through service. It just confuses passengers when they are told to change trains at Sutton.

Would just cause more confusion. Imagine being at Wimbledon station and seeing all the trains going to St Albans with no clear indication which train goes where without double checking online. It also increases the amount of passengers who unknowingly take the extra long way round towards Streatham and beyond. Even worse situation at the St Albans end.

 

[Peter0124]

Would just cause more confusion. Imagine being at Wimbledon station and seeing all the trains going to St Albans with no clear indication which train goes where without double checking online. It also increases the amount of passengers who unknowingly take the extra long way round towards Streatham and beyond. Even worse situation at the St Albans end.

Have them terminate at Sutton as usual, but encouraging people to stay on the train round the loop might be a better option than telling them to 'change'

 

[miklcct]

Would just cause more confusion. Imagine being at Wimbledon station and seeing all the trains going to St Albans with no clear indication which train goes where without double checking online. It also increases the amount of passengers who unknowingly take the extra long way round towards Streatham and beyond. Even worse situation at the St Albans end.

This is where false destinations should be used, similar to the Waterloo - Waterloo and Cannon Street - Cannon Street services.

At Wimbledon, the trains should be shown as St Albans via Tooting and St Albans via Sutton, while outside the loop, the trains can be shown as Mitcham Junction then Wimbledon, and Wimbledon then Mitcham Junction.

 

[RobShipway]

This is a total wild idea, which I know will never happen. But what about having a Service from Salisbury via Basingstoke and Reading to either Guildford, Redhill or Gatwick Airport. It would combine at least three services.

The problem I know will be the paths between Salisbury and Worting Junction. The other issue is also the type of train would be better if possible to be 3rd rail diesel hybrid, which would mean either coaches hauled by class 73 or a multiple unit of some type.

 

[A S Leib]

This is a total wild idea, which I know will never happen. But what about having a Service from Salisbury via Basingstoke and Reading to either Guildford, Redhill or Gatwick Airport. It would combine at least three services.

The problem I know will be the paths between Salisbury and Worting Junction. The other issue is also the type of train would be better if possible to be 3rd rail diesel hybrid, which would mean either coaches hauled by class 73 or a multiple unit of some type.

Another part of the reason why I suspect that wouldn't happen is that Salisbury / Andover are only around ten minutes further from Clapham Junction time-wise than they are from Reading (even taking off time for the latter for changing at Basingstoke), and Gatwick's an hour closer to Clapham Junction than it is to Reading via Guildford (and Guildford's twenty minutes closer), so through Salisbury / Andover - Redhill / Gatwick passengers would be taking an extra thirty-odd minutes (assuming the direct train has good paths and waiting times of twenty minutes at Clapham) for the sake of not changing at one station.

 

[bussnapperwm]

I know it'd mean having to create a new service to fill the gap but the "Leamington Shuttle" (Moor Street - Leamington) and the Banbury - Didcot could be merged

Maybe they could, in the future, merge one of the East West Rail's Milton Keynes - Oxford trains and GWRs London - Oxford (terminating) service.

Another service that could be combined could be the Northern stopper that terminates at Crewe and the London North Western Crewe "wobble" service via Stoke to Birmingham

 

[cle]

Now that it no longer runs through to London, Redhill-Tonbridge could be merged with Strood to Paddock Wood / Tonbridge. And if it could get to Gatwick/Three Bridges on the other side, even more useful as a regional connector. Plenty of platforms at Gatwick now.

 

[JonathanH]

Now that it no longer runs through to London, Redhill-Tonbridge could be merged with Strood to Paddock Wood / Tonbridge. And if it could get to Gatwick/Three Bridges on the other side, even more useful as a regional connector. Plenty of platforms at Gatwick now.

It has been done before and did not materially change loadings. Just because Redhill to Tonbridge and Strood to Paddock Wood are self contained shuttle services does not mean that those are the services which should be joined up across Tonbridge.

With GWR no longer likely to increase services beyond Redhill to Gatwick, perhaps the Tonbridge service could run to Gatwick on the opposite side of the hour to the GWR service but it isn't clear that Maidstone and Strood is the right destination, or that it would be a good use of Southern's 377s.