WCML Open Access Applications Rejected

[465fan]

I meant something to provide links between Morpeth, Alnmouth, Berwick, Reston, Dunbar and East Linton rather than just from them to Newcastle or Edinburgh and back. The draft timetable for this December has 1tph LNER alternating calls between Alnmouth and Berwick and the other fast from Newcastle and CrossCountry serving Morpeth or Alnmouth and Berwick, not leaving much of a service south from Dunbar or between Alnmouth and Morpeth without TPE.

I think this is starting to go off-topic.

Agreed, but well-worth separate discussion in the speculative thread. I know very little of the way people move about in that area and how important something like an all-stopper could be (but then again it has crossover with the WCML, as Avanti alternate their Oxenholme and Penrith stops, which I admittedly think is daft).

 

[styles]

I agree, Stirling is, as is Lockerbie, Motherwell, Whifflet, Greenfaulds and Larbert - however someone could argue it will mostly abstract those who'd otherwise change at Glasgow or Edingburgh; but - if it was those stops alone to London, I'd have no problem.

But those intermediate English stops are the red flag. Unless they are made set down / pick up only, they are clearly a direct revenue raid on the DfT's London income.

Oh I completely agree - behind the PR, Lumo know full well that they'll be abstracting revenue from the NW English cities making journeys both north and south. But the direct Stirling connection would be excellent - if the government had the willingness to do it, I'd choose that over open access, but it seems like they're not going to. In the absence of that government drive, I (reluctantly) support the Lumo operation.

A bit like I reluctantly support Lumo on ECML because LNER are screwing up their fare system and prices something rotten.

I'd much prefer to ditch Lumo and make LNER cheaper, but it won't happen.

 

[A S Leib]

But the direct Stirling connection would be excellent - if the government had the willingness to do it, I'd choose that over open access, but it seems like they're not going to.

Do you mean specifically via the WCML or any Stirling to London route, given the loss of the (early morning?) non-Inverness LNER from Stirling?

 

[styles]

Do you mean specifically via the WCML or any Stirling to London route, given the loss of the (early morning?) non-Inverness LNER from Stirling?

I would be happy with either WCML or ECML.

Currently we just have the Caledonian Sleeper, which I'm sure serves some of the purpose, but it'll also mostly be booked by people not going to/from Stirling, and it fills up fast.

It only needs to be a few services a day.

 

[35B]

Exactly, it's the same as the Carmarthen to Paddington service saying that they're providing useful competition and capacity for new stations, but realistically will just sell operator only tickets for five quid cheaper than the Bristol Parkway/Cardiff to Paddington price, and siphon money off.

I'm not ideologically opposed to OA, but it should offer something new. Stirling/Lanarkshire/Lockerbie/Rochdale to London is new. Selling tickets from Crewe/Nuneaton to London is just revenue abstraction, on top of a net performance risk, plain and simple.

Why is that just abstraction? The bid has had to pass a range of tests, including for abstraction - is it so unreasonable that an operator should be able to offer connections between existing stops too?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

But the direct Stirling connection would be excellent - if the government had the willingness to do it, I'd choose that over open access, but it seems like they're not going to. In the absence of that government drive, I (reluctantly) support the Lumo operation.

The 2012 bids for the ICWC franchise (Virgin and Avanti) included a plan for a WCML service to Stirling, once the wires were up.
But that died a death when Avanti took over and then Covid happened, so it was axed from the franchise commitments (along with much else on ICWC, and still not quite back to the pre-Covid service level).

 

[styles]

The 2012 bids for the ICWC franchise (Virgin and Avanti) included a plan for a WCML service to Stirling, once the wires were up.
But that died a death when Avanti took over and then Covid happened, so it was axed from the franchise commitments (along with much else on ICWC, and still not quite back to the pre-Covid service level).

Didn't know that (albeit I didn't live near Stirling then so didn't really affect me as much!)

Shame really. I don't want to support open access operators, but Lumo on ECML and Hull Trains at least do provide a good value service which LNER just.. wasn't.

 

[Zomboid]

Didn't LNER used to serve Stirling?

Presumably they stopped for a reason.

 

[A S Leib]

There's still the Inverness LNER (10:34 southbound arriving 15:49, 12:00 northbound arriving 17:15).

 

[Zomboid]

I distinctly recall seeing a 91 set on a Kings Cross to Stirling service. Not sure if there were enough of them to be a "service".

 

[swt_passenger]

Didn't LNER used to serve Stirling?

Presumably they stopped for a reason.

At one point the Scottish goverment thought it would be a great idea if the ECML operator was to be stopped from running anywhere beyond Waverley. I think they rapidly back tracked due to the general public taking the polar opposite view. But I suspect for a short period of time LNER were open to reducing certain of their extended services, so the Stirling service, (ie starting or terminating), may have been rubber stamped before too many objections were made.

 

[Class 170101]

Didn't LNER used to serve Stirling?

Presumably they stopped for a reason.

The morning one was an 05:30ish starter from Stirling, this is just plain stupid.

It needed to be the 09:30 from Edinburgh starting back around 08:30.

The 15:00 was just about right for arrival around 20:30 at Stirling.

 

[465fan]

In an ideal world, where Stirling has a beautifully-long, 275m back platform (Platform 10), and with some cooperation with the Scottish government, you'd just have an hourly service from London (LNER) going there. Opens up an east end bay at Edinburgh, and, if running that way (with connections to Dunblane), you could re-route the Edinburgh to Inverness stuff back via Ladybank to Hilton to speed those up.

 

[0161]

Somewhat late to the party here, but the rejection of the Rochdale/Victoria application simply shores up Avanti's monopoly on Lancashire/Manchester to London services. There is a serious lack of a secondary, slower, cheaper alternative service between Manchester and London.
Travelling to Crewe via Northern to pick up the LNW stopper is somewhat of an inconvenience for customers who are served with Victoria trains as opposed to Piccadilly.

 

[weeklycommuter]

Somewhat late to the party here, but the rejection of the Rochdale/Victoria application simply shores up Avanti's monopoly on Lancashire/Manchester to London services. There is a serious lack of a secondary, slower, cheaper alternative service between Manchester and London.

For additional direct passenger train services between London and Rochdale/Victoria to be possible HS2 phases 1 and 2a London to Birmingham and Crewe would have to be completed.

The West Coast Mainline is full from the Trent Valley to London and if HS2 is only built to Handsacre Junction it will be impossible to get any more trains than now through Colwich Junction regardless of whether they connect to and from the South on HS2 or the Trent Valley section of the West Coast Mainline.

 

[The Ham]

For additional direct passenger train services between London and Rochdale/Victoria to be possible HS2 phases 1 and 2a London to Birmingham and Crewe would have to be completed.

The West Coast Mainline is full from the Trent Valley to London and if HS2 is only built to Handsacre Junction it will be impossible to get any more trains than now through Colwich Junction regardless of whether they connect to and from the South on HS2 or the Trent Valley section of the West Coast Mainline.

It's the reason why I thought the bravest thing a politician ever did was stand up in Manchester and say "were going to make it so your rail services aren't going to be able to be improved as much as they could have been"

HS2 wouldn't have only allowed more London services, it would have also improved platform capacity for local services by removing intercity trains from the existing platforms.

 

[Harpo]

It's the reason why I thought the bravest thing a politician ever did was stand up in Manchester and say "were going to make it so your rail services aren't going to be able to be improved as much as they could have been"

….and announced it in a disused railway station. Genius.

 

[frodshamfella]

Last year LNWR proposed extending Crewe services to Manchester Victoria via Warrington Bank Quay. Any non LNWR proposals will face the same the same block as the OAs.

LNWR did do a Liverpool to Euston direct a few years ago. I think it was the extend Liverpool to Birmingham service. It made it pretty unreliable, caught delays on the way.

 

[Bletchleyite]

LNWR did do a Liverpool to Euston direct a few years ago. I think it was the extend Liverpool to Birmingham service. It made it pretty unreliable, caught delays on the way.

It essentially destroyed the south WCML timetable completely. COVID thankfully saved us from it.

 

[TheGrew]

Assuming track capacity north of Crewe, I quite like the idea of the LNWR Destination Manchester as it doesn't require more capacity on the south WCML. Though I would have the concerns of the old Euston-Liverpool service and picking up delays en-route. At least if there were issues on the WCML, you could relatively easily turn prematurely at Crewe or Warrington (even Earlstown and Newton are possible, but more tricky).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Assuming track capacity north of Crewe, I quite like the idea of the LNWR Destination Manchester as it doesn't require more capacity on the south WCML.

It soon would because I suspect it would be so popular frequencies might need to increase.

Though I would have the concerns of the old Euston-Liverpool service and picking up delays en-route. At least if there were issues on the WCML, you could relatively easily turn prematurely at Crewe or Warrington (even Earlstown and Newton are possible, but more tricky).

That was more because it cross pollinated delays across Birmingham. As long as it stayed away from Castlefield (i.e. ran to Victoria via Chat Moss which I believe was the plan), it wouldn't be anywhere near the same issue.

 

[Zomboid]

It soon would because I suspect it would be so popular frequencies might need to increase

That doesn't sound like a reason to not do something. I guess it could run as up to a 240m long train, and if that's not enough then it's a good problem to have, surely. Though a difficult one to solve, at least this side of HS2.

If there's space and trains to do it then it's an extension of the Trent Valley stopper, I assume.

 

[rmHawk765]

Funny how by rejecting these they've proved the need for full HS2 themselves.

 

[0161]

Assuming track capacity north of Crewe, I quite like the idea of the LNWR Destination Manchester as it doesn't require more capacity on the south WCML. Though I would have the concerns of the old Euston-Liverpool service and picking up delays en-route. At least if there were issues on the WCML, you could relatively easily turn prematurely at Crewe or Warrington (even Earlstown and Newton are possible, but more tricky).

This. We're constantly being told that the south WCML is full, the current services are sacrosanct, and no new paths are available ever.
A Euston - Manchester stopper is a much more attractive proposition than a Liverpool one. Surely it's just as simple as extending the Crewe service to Victoria via WBQ and Earlestown?
One would have thought the arrival of GBR would make decisions like this easier, as opposed to pandering to the existing TOC"s and protecting their monopoly.
Birmingham has three different TOC's offering services to London. Manchester has one. Competition hasn't happened.

 

[Howardh]

Somewhat late to the party here, but the rejection of the Rochdale/Victoria application simply shores up Avanti's monopoly on Lancashire/Manchester to London services. There is a serious lack of a secondary, slower, cheaper alternative service between Manchester and London.
Travelling to Crewe via Northern to pick up the LNW stopper is somewhat of an inconvenience for customers who are served with Victoria trains as opposed to Piccadilly.

I've often wondered if LNW could apply to run their trains to Piccadilly and/or Preston. But to be honest I wouldn't want three hours+ on one of their trains, especially now there's no first class section (although the seats are still 2x2 there). I did use then from Crewe (first class - advance cheap tickets) when Avanti were in a total shambolic mess, can't remember whether that was before or after Covid, probably before? But if they could get some more suitable stock and run more-or-less directly, could they do Manchester-London in 2.5hrs?

 

[0161]

I've often wondered if LNW could apply to run their trains to Piccadilly and/or Preston. But to be honest I wouldn't want three hours+ on one of their trains, especially now there's no first class section (although the seats are still 2x2 there). I did use then from Crewe (first class - advance cheap tickets) when Avanti were in a total shambolic mess, can't remember whether that was before or after Covid, probably before? But if they could get some more suitable stock and run more-or-less directly, could they do Manchester-London in 2.5hrs?

I've never done the LNW from Crewe, as it's a hassle if you're coming from the other side of Manchester. Avanti prices just seem absolutely insane compared to what they were a few years ago (and certainly compared to Virgin)
Personally I'd welcome a service which avoided Stockport and Piccadilly (this is a hugely congested, not to mention well served route, anyway) which was around the 3 hour mark, provided that the cost was reflective of this.

 

[TheGrew]

As someone who did Stafford->Euston on LNW back when I was a student (I paid £6) back when it went via Northampton, it was an acceptable journey. If the price was competitive, I would argue a journey from Victoria->London probably competes just as much with Shudehill Coach station as Avanti. I appreciate my bias living in Newton-le-Willows, but as well as a direct service to London, I also see other very useful pairs being opened up by such a train. At the moment, for example, most hours, there is only a single train from Warrington to Crewe (and stops at intermediate stations would give much better commuting connectivity from Cheshire into Warrington). From Warrington to London, another semi-fast service that I expect would be competitive than the via-Birmingham service for time would be welcome.

 

[The Planner]

This. We're constantly being told that the south WCML is full, the current services are sacrosanct, and no new paths are available ever.
A Euston - Manchester stopper is a much more attractive proposition than a Liverpool one. Surely it's just as simple as extending the Crewe service to Victoria via WBQ and Earlestown?
One would have thought the arrival of GBR would make decisions like this easier, as opposed to pandering to the existing TOC"s and protecting their monopoly.
Birmingham has three different TOC's offering services to London. Manchester has one. Competition hasn't happened.

No. There isn't enough power to increase electric services north of Crewe from what has already been agreed.

I've often wondered if LNW could apply to run their trains to Piccadilly and/or Preston. But to be honest I wouldn't want three hours+ on one of their trains, especially now there's no first class section (although the seats are still 2x2 there). I did use then from Crewe (first class - advance cheap tickets) when Avanti were in a total shambolic mess, can't remember whether that was before or after Covid, probably before? But if they could get some more suitable stock and run more-or-less directly, could they do Manchester-London in 2.5hrs?

Its 2 hours 11 from Crewe to Euston via LNWR, you are not doing the rest in 19 minutes.

 

[Class 170101]

No. There isn't enough power to increase electric services north of Crewe from what has already been agreed.

Is that in all directions north of Crewe or on specific routes eg north to Preston, north east to Manchester or northwest to Liverpool?

 

[Bald Rick]

Is that in all directions north of Crewe or on specific routes eg north to Preston, north east to Manchester or northwest to Liverpool?

Crewe to Weaver Junction.

However Crewe to Manchester via Stockport or Styal is constrained by capacity at Piccadilly.