West Coast franchise timetable - what would you do?

[Zoe]

calling at Milton Keynes, Lichfield, Tamworth, Crewe, Wilmslow, Stockport, Manchester.

Tamworth is before Lichfield.

 

[Mr Spock]

Unfortunately it does not seem to matter to the people in charge what most of us would deem to be sensible stopping patterns as the whole concept of "fast" trains on the West Coast is to get to/from London.

 

[gordonthemoron]

same problem has applied to EC since Eureka

 

[Zoe]

same problem has applied to EC since Eureka

But Grantham, Newark and Retford do still get a direct intercity service to London.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

With NXEA!'s, do Warrington and Wigan get no London trains then?

 

[Lampshade]

It may be slightly slower timetabled, but in reality it's often actually quicker (as radamfi says there's loads of padding). I guess you could argue that the padding could be used for an additional station stop somewhere, and I wouldn't disagree with that (in which case we will have about 10 different views on whether it should be WFJ, MKC, RUG, NUN and so on, I'm sure even Rugeley TV will get a vote too! )

It's got to be Lichfield Trent Valley surely? It's the only city on the WCML without a fast London service.

 

[Zoe]

It's got to be Lichfield Trent Valley surely? It's the only city on the WCML without a fast London service.

It may well be a city but it has a population less than half of Nuneaton or Tamworth. Looking at the population of towns/cities on the line you have: 1. Tamworth 2. Nuneaton 3. Stafford 4. Rugby 5. Lichfield 6. Rugeley.

 

[Lampshade]

It may well be a city but it has a population less than half of Nuneaton or Tamworth. Looking at the population of towns/cities on the line you have: 1. Tamworth 2. Nuneaton 3. Stafford 4. Rugby 5. Lichfield 6. Rugeley.

In that case maybe it'd be better for a new OAO e.g. Staffordshire Trains to run non stop to Tamworth, then Lichfield, Rugeley, Stafford and terminate at Stoke.

Paths shouldn't be a problem, it could overtake the LM stopper when it goes via Northampton and keep it on the slows through Rugby.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

This has been discussed a few times before and I think it's clear that Virgin and the dft are not interested in serving places like Nuneaton and Tamworth. The headline journey times are much more important to them.

I fear that you are correct in your assumptions on certain towns.

 

[WestCountry]

non stop to Tamworth, then Lichfield, Rugeley, Stafford and terminate at Stoke.

Or when MCR have finished, through to Leek and/or Alton Towers?

 

[Lampshade]

Or when MCR have finished, through to Leek and/or Alton Towers?

Even better, or somewhere like Uttoxeter.

 

[NXEA!]

With NXEA!'s, do Warrington and Wigan get no London trains then?

Oh sh*t, didn't mean to leave them out intentionally, forgot about them completely! :$ And as for the Lichfield/Tamworth thing Zoe, I can never remember which way around those two go aha, thanks.

 

[Zoe]

In that case maybe it'd be better for a new OAO e.g. Staffordshire Trains to run non stop to Tamworth, then Lichfield, Rugeley, Stafford and terminate at Stoke.

I expect any such application would be rejected due a franchised TOC (London Midland) losing revenue as a result.

 

[A0]

Regarding the discussion on the lack of fast services from Nuneaton. All of this has concentrated on services to London, the northbound services leave a lot to be desired. :cry:

Anyone travelling to Liverpool, Manchester and all points North West has to endure an hourly 'stopper' to at least Stafford before any onward travel.

Thanks to the Cross Country sevices, a large percentage of passengers travelling from the East Midlands to the North West also use this service and to see the incredulous expressions on the faces when the list of calling points and more changes are announced often makes me smile!

Why the Eus-Liv calls at Stafford only and not Nuneaton is strange, the main connections from Stafford are all served by direct trains from London anyway. The only convenience is for passengers travelling to Stafford only, which must be a lot less than the potential passengers to and from the connections at Nuneaton.

I await the response from 'Disgusted from Stafford'!

Not strictly true - the other option from Nuneaton is to travel via B'ham New St.

So 1 or 2 stops to New St.

Manchester can then be done using the XC service which first stops at Wolves or Stafford.

Liverpool has the LM service from NS.

Destinations to the NW can be achieved using the B'ham - Glasgow service.

Same applies to Tamworth.

Lichfield doesn't work quite so well as the TV - B'ham NS is an all stops journey, but then you're only 2 stops to Stafford in any case.

 

[Lampshade]

I expect any such application would be rejected due a franchised TOC (London Midland) losing revenue as a result.

Maybe not, it's a completely different market, much like VT/LM at Crewe and Birmingham and EC/FCC at Peterborough. I wouldn't call it 'losing revenue', it's a free market, it's competition.

Besides, Hull Trains manage at Doncaster, Retford, Grantham and Stevenage.

 

[Zoe]

Didn't Alliance Rail want to run a service on the WCML calling at Nuneaton and Tamworth though only to have their application rejected?

 

[Lampshade]

Alliance's application was rejected because, I quote:

* refused Alliance's application to operate services between Euston and Leeds/Bradford interchange/Blackpool and Carlisle. The application was not completed fully and did not provide sufficient information and data by the deadline for it to be considered. Alliance subsequently submitted a detailed submission in support of its application, but we were unable to consult on it for reasons of commercial confidentiality. We will be discussing with Alliance how it can take forward any revised application.

Grand Central wanted to stop at Preston and Milton Keynes, which already have fast services, their application was rejected because the plans were primarily abstractive.

 

[Zoe]

Grand Central wanted to stop at Preston and Milton Keynes, which already have fast services, their application was rejected because the plans were primarily abstractive.

Yes, that was the primary issue sorry, not the Alliance plan for the Trent Valley stations. The only concern is that London Midland already run a direct service from Nuneaton and Tamworth to London and as suggested above this connects with a Virgin service. Could this not still be seen as abstracting revenue from the franchised TOC?

 

[Lampshade]

The only concern is that London Midland already run a direct service from Nuneaton and Tamworth to London and as suggested above this connects with a Virgin service. Could this not still be seen as abstracting revenue from the franchised TOC?

A direct service is all very well, but journey planners put you on the connecting VT service anyway, so it's a direct service in name only, it's not that useful. And while there is a connecting VT service, it's just that, a connecting service, not a direct one.

I don't think the whole revenue abstraction argument works in this situation, London Midland is not an intercity TOC and it's therefore a completely different market. Privatisation was supposed to encourage competition, this can't happen if everyone cries revenue abstraction at every proposal.

 

[WatcherZero]

Remember there was a no-competition clause of the Virgin franchise (while they funded line improvements) but that clause ends in 2012. From then on any new service is free to operate on the WCML no matter where so long as it generates new passengers rather than being abstractive, so things like the no stopping at main destinations are out the window. They just need to mix it up by offering alternate destinations or different times.

 

[Masbroughlad]

I hope we see the Open Access operators have some success on West Coast next year.

 

[WatcherZero]

Yes but then sadly it comes down to paths, theres no spare paths south of Birmingham, one spare path between Birmingham and Preston and no spare paths north of Preston. To add more paths you could do some work at the Preston bottleneck and the Birmingham-Preston stretch but you cant really find any more paths south of Birmingham.

 

[Lampshade]

Yes but then sadly it comes down to paths, theres no spare paths south of Birmingham, one spare path between Birmingham and Preston and no spare paths north of Preston. To add more paths you could do some work at the Preston bottleneck and the Birmingham-Preston stretch but you cant really find any more paths south of Birmingham.

This puzzles me, there's a gap of around 35 mins where nothing heads north from Preston on the WCML, everything else goes north between xx35 and xx58.

 

[WatcherZero]

Something to do with the line speeds and headways, Virgin will be extending one of the current Preston terminators so thats three. Theres also the local and TPE services.

 

[Invincibles]

Could an open access operator do anything with:

Birmingham - Wolverhampton - Stafford - Crewe - Newton le Willows - Manchester Victoria

Birmingham - Wolverhampton - Stafford - Crewe - Altrincham - Stockport*

Birmingham - Wolverhampton - Stafford - Crewe - Manchester Airport

It would be brilliant to be able to do:

Leicester - Nuneaton - Stafford - Crewe - Newton le Willows - Manchester Victoria

But I can see why that one can not happen, particularly in the up direction

 

[js47604]

When the NR Control centre at MK is operational next year I suspect the WCML franchise will demand more trains to stop at MKC

 

[Johnny Lewis]

This puzzles me, there's a gap of around 35 mins where nothing heads north from Preston on the WCML, everything else goes north between xx35 and xx58.

This is to give sufficient gaps in the passenger service to allow freight trains to run at moderately decent speeds without being constantly looped by faster passenger trains. It is called "flighting".

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I have read all the previous 87 posts with interest and see "hoped-for" aspirations for areas wishing to have a stop on such a major route. It makes me feel that I am fortunate indeed to live so near to both Macclesfield station and Wilmslow station, who both have such stops.

 

[cle]

I agree Nuneaton should get an hourly stop on a faster train. Either the Liverpool or Chester trains could afford another stop - and the Nuneaton train should also stop at Crewe.

I think Watford could have a Manchester stop, on the via Wilmslow service again giving it Crewe.

Otherwise I think it's good. I travel to Glasgow a fair bit and it does need to be fast. Once the Fylde is wired, I don't think Glasgow trains should stop before Preston.

A more semi-fast Pendo (maybe Nuneaton - Stafford - Crewe- Warrington - Wigan - Preston - Blackpool) could mop up the smaller stops. XC services can link these places to Birmingham, Manchester and Scotland.

And Glasgow I'd have Preston - Lancaster - Carlisle and Glasgow, with a few peaks at Motherwell and Oxenholme. Penrith I think can probably be cut.

Liverpool is fine hourly, as is Chester - although I'd have more North Wales trains on weekends, where I think demand is highest.

 

[krisk]

Manchester - New Mills/Stockport then direct to St Pancras
Liverpool - St Helens - Warrington - Crewe - MK - Euston PEAK ONLY

Euston to Preston run through to Blackpool calling at Poulton

From my experience you can not add a MK stop onto Manchester trains that call at Crewe


Also want to see a Liverpool and Manchester service amalgamate at Preston to then head north to Edinburgh or Glasgow on alternate hours.