• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Various consultations on the May 2022 East Coast Mainline timetable

Status
Not open for further replies.

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,857
Location
Central Belt
Interesting they are giving up on passengers ever wanting to use the train between Newark and Retford. Are people really going to go via Doncaster? I know the current service is not going to get people out the car. But I know when you are doing a massive change like this some journeys need to be sacrificed.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
I like the sound of these proposals, they sound a pretty rational way of dealing with demand/ capacity/ finite numbers of both paths and seats

Some of the "reductions" are pretty trivial - I used to use the Leeds - Aberdeen occasionally when I lived in Leeds and travelled on business (07:10 departure?), but it was only ever a way of getting the HST from Neville Hill to the ECML at York - it wasn't really about significant demand, more just that if you're running it ECS east out of Neville Hill to York then it wouldn't take much longer to run it west of out Neville Hill into Leeds and reverse - only a couple of miles.

Cutting the TPE service back to one per hour on the York - Newcastle leg is similarly pragmatic - there are too many trains on that line - I've suggested (several times!) that the XC service would make sense to cut (even though it'd inconvenience me personally) - the fact that they are talking about cutting the TPE service instead is still a positive use of stock in the grand scheme of things (I'd rather we had doubled up Voyagers through Sheffield due to the XC service north of York being trimmed back, mind)

Leeds - Newcastle still has more seats per hour than it used to (bar the brief period of TPE running every 15/45 minutes - the poor split being because of the box-ticking obsession with trying to maintain both a Liverpool and Manchester Airport service), so I think they'll still fit everyone on

Similar box-ticking re the Kings Cross - Sunderland LNER services. Sunderland is a big place and Sunderland deserves better services, but the token extension of a couple of Newcastle trains per day was pretty irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Hopefully under our "unified" network we'll have fewer of these daft little oddities.

If anything, the most annoying change is putting the teatime XC service back through Doncaster (rather than it currently providing some relief on the busy Leeds - Sheffield flow) - that's rather annoying (but, hey, it keeps things nice and "standard", I can understand why it makes sense to some, even if it means I'll have to stand from time to time on an existing service, or slum it on a 150 via Castleford!)
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
4,008
I would assume that the peak-focused changes like XC via Doncaster will enable another service between Sheffield and Leeds.

This isn't just about London flows. It's also recognizing that LNER is the best use of capacity (longest trains and electric) - for interim ECML journeys. So if there is a question about who should bear the burden for York/Darlington to Newcastle/Edinburgh, it 100% should be LNER.

Manchester to Newcastle hourly is fine. It's not a huge market, and Liverpool less so. Newcastle to Leeds deserves 2pth. And it's pretty far from the Manchester Airport sphere, so not a major loss.

As said, Newcastle is way more connected to London and to Edinburgh than any of the northern cities or Birmingham. That's just a fact. It doesn't really belong in the 'northern powerhouse' discussions really, it's a totally separate region with its own needs and priorities - which are not Manchester-centric.
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,857
Location
Central Belt
Not for DfT to decide, if having Open Access "on the hour" is the best use of capacity



Good point (and also non-stop London-Donny); looks like the xx00 path is "good" on alternate hours only. Logically a non-stop path would also exist about xx27, in front of the xx30 the whole way.

Looks also like an ~xx17/18 path will exist for Hull Trains (when there isn't an xx27)



Presumably an xx00/xx30 departure could become xx55/25 (or thereabouts) in those hours.
It is hard to figure this out to be honest,

I see the Aberdeen service is at 1600 for the last one, but the normal pattern is seems to be x03. (Like Stirling)

Is there actually a document showing the London time? Looking at Newark North Gates times, x12 seems to be standard for Edinburgh which would fit with the x03.

Lincoln is interesting - Better spread in the day. Slower journey time. Unless EMR change their Leicester - Grimsby timetable, totally missing their connections.
 

southern442

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2013
Messages
2,186
Location
Surrey
I think the consultation does explain that the overall route capacity doesn’t exist. The power supply is a problem but would have been overcome for TPE purposes by running in diesel mode as they do now, so that can’t have been the main reason.
(Apologies if I sound like a madman) but they were running trains on that stretch to a higher frequency than this prior to covid were they not? It seems as though they are cutting services because they say there isn't space to run them, and yet they have all had space to run in the past?
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,857
Location
Central Belt
(Apologies if I sound like a madman) but they were running trains on that stretch to a higher frequency than this prior to covid were they not? It seems as though they are cutting services because they say there isn't space to run them, and yet they have all had space to run in the past?
The TPE services were really a ORCATs raid - I think that is why they are getting cut back. Manchester - Scotland passengers would always go on the WCML so the main losers are Huddersfield - North of Newcastle passengers. If they made Manchester - Edinburgh via WCML hourly the Northern objections would soon go. Yes the Leeds - Edinburgh cut-back to every 30 minutes may upset a few, but XC seems to be able to cope with this demand as it is. I know everyone doesn't want to go to London. I am sure the XC route Doncaster will be preferred, if they get a good path they may be able to shrink the journey Newcastle - Birmingham journey at last.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Yeah, it's not what I would do, though I would stop running past Newcastle to Edinburgh.

Interestingly, XC propose to revert the evening peak Newcastle-Reading service each way (that currently goes via Leeds as a peak extra), back to via Doncaster as per the standard hour (ostenisbly due to a lack of path through Leeds).


Probably the respective fares revenue from each flow is the evidence.

All the same, are they sure they can find an extrahowever many people an hour to pay a premium price to go to London ?

Are they that lacking in capacity (real, not covid) that they won't have to bother puting in cheap AP ?

I could get behind this idea if they were going to reinstate Newcastle -Lancashire services via Belah and Barnard Castle to make up, but somehow I doubt this is their plan.

I like the sound of these proposals, they sound a pretty rational way of dealing with demand/ capacity/ finite numbers of both paths and seats

Some of the "reductions" are pretty trivial - I used to use the Leeds - Aberdeen occasionally when I lived in Leeds and travelled on business (07:10 departure?), but it was only ever a way of getting the HST from Neville Hill to the ECML at York - it wasn't really about significant demand, more just that if you're running it ECS east out of Neville Hill to York then it wouldn't take much longer to run it west of out Neville Hill into Leeds and reverse - only a couple of miles.

Cutting the TPE service back to one per hour on the York - Newcastle leg is similarly pragmatic - there are too many trains on that line - I've suggested (several times!) that the XC service would make sense to cut (even though it'd inconvenience me personally) - the fact that they are talking about cutting the TPE service instead is still a positive use of stock in the grand scheme of things (I'd rather we had doubled up Voyagers through Sheffield due to the XC service north of York being trimmed back, mind)

Leeds - Newcastle still has more seats per hour than it used to (bar the brief period of TPE running every 15/45 minutes - the poor split being because of the box-ticking obsession with trying to maintain both a Liverpool and Manchester Airport service), so I think they'll still fit everyone on

Similar box-ticking re the Kings Cross - Sunderland LNER services. Sunderland is a big place and Sunderland deserves better services, but the token extension of a couple of Newcastle trains per day was pretty irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Hopefully under our "unified" network we'll have fewer of these daft little oddities.

If anything, the most annoying change is putting the teatime XC service back through Doncaster (rather than it currently providing some relief on the busy Leeds - Sheffield flow) - that's rather annoying (but, hey, it keeps things nice and "standard", I can understand why it makes sense to some, even if it means I'll have to stand from time to time on an existing service, or slum it on a 150 via Castleford!)

Am I misunderstanding ? From the OP, it sounded as though they were proposing no TPE to Newcastle.
 

43074

Established Member
Joined
10 Oct 2012
Messages
2,003
Cutting the TPE service back to one per hour on the York - Newcastle leg is similarly pragmatic - there are too many trains on that line - I've suggested (several times!) that the XC service would make sense to cut (even though it'd inconvenience me personally) - the fact that they are talking about cutting the TPE service instead is still a positive use of stock in the grand scheme of things (I'd rather we had doubled up Voyagers through Sheffield due to the XC service north of York being trimmed back, mind)
That in itself is fairly rational; what isn't is just replacing it with a third London train which is non stop between Grantham and York!

I'm also disliking all the two hourly variations between Alnmouth/Berwick, Durham/Darlington, TPE Middlesbrough trains not serving Northallerton every other hour in one direction, etc. Even this iteration of the ECML timetable trying to fit too many trains.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
(Apologies if I sound like a madman) but they were running trains on that stretch to a higher frequency than this prior to covid were they not? It seems as though they are cutting services because they say there isn't space to run them, and yet they have all had space to run in the past?
No, because the full LNER and First Group services hadn’t started yet.
 

TheBigD

Established Member
Joined
19 Nov 2008
Messages
1,991
Nice to see earlier LNER services from London to Scotland 0548 (Aberdeen) and a later 2020 southbound Edinburgh to London, presumably a direct response to East Coast Trains proposed offering.

Disappointed by the slightly earlier finish to services from London on a Saturday evening though.

Less southbound services from Edinburgh to London on Sundays though there's still 3 an hour south of Newcastle to London (similar to pre covid)

Will have a proper look at everything later...
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,542
Location
Redcar
Am I misunderstanding ? From the OP, it sounded as though they were proposing no TPE to Newcastle.
There will be one TPE per hour on Liverpool - Newcastle (rather than Edinburgh) still. It's the Newcastle - Airport that's being cut to Manchester Victoria - York reducing from two trains per hour to one for TPE to/from Newcastle.
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,857
Location
Central Belt
Probably worth adding to the OP, Great Northern are also consulting on a number of changes as part of this, link below.

Nice to see the Thameslink services into the core actually real (as in on a timetable) - Be a big boost for people on the line to WGC.

Not sure what the reaction will be that the services stopping at Welwyn, Hatfield etc start at Royston (Letchworth) - A lot of people get off from the north in the morning, but not sure where they have came from.
 

Bayum

Established Member
Joined
21 Mar 2008
Messages
2,902
Location
Leeds
Certainly very interesting. The Saltburn services not going to be operating via Northallerton? Is capacity that constrained that a service crawling through can't afford to stop?
 

YorksLad12

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2020
Messages
1,875
Location
Leeds
Some of the "reductions" are pretty trivial - I used to use the Leeds - Aberdeen occasionally when I lived in Leeds and travelled on business (07:10 departure?), but it was only ever a way of getting the HST from Neville Hill to the ECML at York - it wasn't really about significant demand, more just that if you're running it ECS east out of Neville Hill to York then it wouldn't take much longer to run it west of out Neville Hill into Leeds and reverse - only a couple of miles.
I still want to see London - Leeds - York - Newcastle from LNER but I'm very much in the minority here (and elsewhere). But yes, the Aberdeen service was more about stock moves (didn't it return to Leeds via Doncaster?)

If anything, the most annoying change is putting the teatime XC service back through Doncaster (rather than it currently providing some relief on the busy Leeds - Sheffield flow) - that's rather annoying (but, hey, it keeps things nice and "standard", I can understand why it makes sense to some, even if it means I'll have to stand from time to time on an existing service, or slum it on a 150 via Castleford!)
You've just reminded me: at the end of the TPE document somewhere it mentions the Leeds-Westgate-Sheffield service. Interestingly, the other two services it mentions could be considered TPE services... are they putting in a bid to run the oft-delayed service instead of Northern?
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,857
Location
Central Belt
Certainly very interesting. The Saltburn services not going to be operating via Northallerton? Is capacity that constrained that a service crawling through can't afford to stop?
Probably, if it can stay on the relief lines and avoid the station altogether. I guess the stop really eats paths (particularly Northbound)
 

Watershed

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
11,945
Location
UK
Certainly very interesting. The Saltburn services not going to be operating via Northallerton? Is capacity that constrained that a service crawling through can't afford to stop?
There are avoiding lines at Northallerton (via Boroughbridge Level Crossing) which avoid all conflict with the ECML. There's only the slight disadvantage of being unable to call at Northallerton...

But back to your original point, it is perfectly feasible that a timetable might only work with a train running non-stop as opposed to stopping. It could make 3-4 mins difference in effective 'headway'.
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,857
Location
Central Belt
I still want to see London - Leeds - York - Newcastle from LNER but I'm very much in the minority here (and elsewhere). But yes, the Aberdeen service was more about stock moves (didn't it return to Leeds via Doncaster?)
London as well. The stop was always on the last London - Leeds service.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
Certainly very interesting. The Saltburn services not going to be operating via Northallerton? Is capacity that constrained that a service crawling through can't afford to stop?
It says ‘up to four’ southbound services will not call. Presumably the rest and all northbounds will call?
 

TheBigD

Established Member
Joined
19 Nov 2008
Messages
1,991
I see the southbound 0540 Edinburgh-Kings Cross gains a York stop and us 10 minutes slower. No more 4 hour Edinburgh-London run.
 

lkpridgeon

Verified Rep - FastJP
Joined
30 Jan 2019
Messages
290
Location
Micheldever Station / Saxilby
Slightly disappointed in the 19:06 KGX to LCN has been moved to 1943 and the last LCN to SHF is now 21.28 instead of 22.44 hence removing a connection to Saxilby and Gainsborough that I frequently use. I'm hoping the EMR Lincoln to Doncaster rectifies this.

And the removal of the direct service between Newark and Retford is a slight pain.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
There will be one TPE per hour on Liverpool - Newcastle (rather than Edinburgh) still. It's the Newcastle - Airport that's being cut to Manchester Victoria - York reducing from two trains per hour to one for TPE to/from Newcastle.

Ah, that's not so bad. I can see one train an hour from Newcastle to Liverpool - so long as its a long train !

No justification for getting rid of 185's or mk5's as far as I can see !
 

MikeWM

Established Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
4,382
Location
Ely
Probably worth adding to the OP, Great Northern are also consulting on a number of changes as part of this, link below.


So looks like we're still not going to get the later last train north of Cambridge that was 'promised' in the 2018 timetable change. Guess that's never going to happen now, but its a shame.

Looks like Ely also loses the 094x starter that joins to the ex-Kings Lynn at Cambridge, which was planned for May 2020. I suppose that is less of an issue now with 8-car running (though it seems they are keeping the 084x starter, which was also planned for May 2020).

No Sunday timetables there, but I bet they won't be planning on anything earlier north of Cambridge than the current ridiculously late start, either.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
I would assume that the peak-focused changes like XC via Doncaster will enable another service between Sheffield and Leeds

In theory - I just can't see Northern finding the stock for it

(mind you, Northern supposedly ordered enough 195s for their proposed services, including the Bradford - Leeds - Westgate - Sheffield - Nottingham service, so ideally there are some sat around spare that could fill this path - I know that's not true though - sadly!)

This isn't just about London flows. It's also recognizing that LNER is the best use of capacity (longest trains and electric) - for interim ECML journeys. So if there is a question about who should bear the burden for York/Darlington to Newcastle/Edinburgh, it 100% should be LNER.

Manchester to Newcastle hourly is fine. It's not a huge market, and Liverpool less so. Newcastle to Leeds deserves 2pth. And it's pretty far from the Manchester Airport sphere, so not a major loss.

As said, Newcastle is way more connected to London and to Edinburgh than any of the northern cities or Birmingham. That's just a fact. It doesn't really belong in the 'northern powerhouse' discussions really, it's a totally separate region with its own needs and priorities - which are not Manchester-centric.

Agreed - a nine/ten coach 800/801 would be much better use of a path from Newcastle to York - if that means a third London service and only one Manchester service (or a cut in Birmingham services) then I'm relaxed about that

Am I misunderstanding ? From the OP, it sounded as though they were proposing no TPE to Newcastle.

Newcastle goes back to an hourly Manchester service - effectively what it traditionally had - and like in the days of TPE introducing a "fifth path" it's a Liverpool one with no more Manchester Airport services - fair enough IMHO

That in itself is fairly rational; what isn't is just replacing it with a third London train which is non stop between Grantham and York!

I'm not convinced of the (proposed) stopping patters at the southern end of the ECML - I certainly don't like trains running non-stop through Doncaster (though it's understandable on the Aberdeen/Inverness services) - there are a lot of links there (and I'll declare an interest in having made many connections there over the years!)

I'm also disliking all the two hourly variations between Alnmouth/Berwick, Durham/Darlington, TPE Middlesbrough trains not serving Northallerton every other hour in one direction, etc. Even this iteration of the ECML timetable trying to fit too many trains.

I can see the logic in some of the Northumberland stuff - there's no paths spare for a "stopper", so how do you try to provide some functional service between the places that are between Edinburgh and Newcastle? (rather than having every service just make one stop between Edinburgh and Newcastle, which means people having to double back) - I don't think there's a way of pleasing everyone here

I still want to see London - Leeds - York - Newcastle from LNER but I'm very much in the minority here (and elsewhere).

Doncaster - York is about twenty minutes (there are obviously no intermediate stops)

Doncaster - Leeds is about thirty minutes, Leeds - York is about thirty minutes, so assuming you can get paths that match up each side of Leeds, and don't have a long dwell at Leeds itself, you're talking a time penalty of around forty minutes for running (London) Doncaster - Leeds - York (Newcastle) - I can't see who would benefit from that kind of service (other than first thing/ last thing in the day, when there's maybe not enough demand to warrant a London - Leeds service and a London - Newcastle service, but combining them might be a way of making a service viable - but that was more of a British Rail era solution for fringe services, the ECML is busy enough for Leeds and Newcastle services to be separate IMHO

But yes, the Aberdeen service was more about stock moves (didn't it return to Leeds via Doncaster?)

I think that the southbound movement (Edinburgh - Doncaster - Leeds) was a way of getting a 91 back to Neville Hill

No justification for getting rid of 185's or mk5's as far as I can see !

The Mk5s seem to have been a bit of a failure, but people's reactions to them are fairly clouded by whether they have a blind spot for loco hauled rakes or not!
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
In theory - I just can't see Northern finding the stock for it

(mind you, Northern supposedly ordered enough 195s for their proposed services, including the Bradford - Leeds - Westgate - Sheffield - Nottingham service, so ideally there are some sat around spare that could fill this path - I know that's not true though - sadly!)



Agreed - a nine/ten coach 800/801 would be much better use of a path from Newcastle to York - if that means a third London service and only one Manchester service (or a cut in Birmingham services) then I'm relaxed about that



Newcastle goes back to an hourly Manchester service - effectively what it traditionally had - and like in the days of TPE introducing a "fifth path" it's a Liverpool one with no more Manchester Airport services - fair enough IMHO



I'm not convinced of the (proposed) stopping patters at the southern end of the ECML - I certainly don't like trains running non-stop through Doncaster (though it's understandable on the Aberdeen/Inverness services) - there are a lot of links there (and I'll declare an interest in having made many connections there over the years!)



I can see the logic in some of the Northumberland stuff - there's no paths spare for a "stopper", so how do you try to provide some functional service between the places that are between Edinburgh and Newcastle? (rather than having every service just make one stop between Edinburgh and Newcastle, which means people having to double back) - I don't think there's a way of pleasing everyone here



Doncaster - York is about twenty minutes (there are obviously no intermediate stops)

Doncaster - Leeds is about thirty minutes, Leeds - York is about thirty minutes, so assuming you can get paths that match up each side of Leeds, and don't have a long dwell at Leeds itself, you're talking a time penalty of around forty minutes for running (London) Doncaster - Leeds - York (Newcastle) - I can't see who would benefit from that kind of service (other than first thing/ last thing in the day, when there's maybe not enough demand to warrant a London - Leeds service and a London - Newcastle service, but combining them might be a way of making a service viable - but that was more of a British Rail era solution for fringe services, the ECML is busy enough for Leeds and Newcastle services to be separate IMHO



I think that the southbound movement (Edinburgh - Doncaster - Leeds) was a way of getting a 91 back to Neville Hill



The Mk5s seem to have been a bit of a failure, but people's reactions to them are fairly clouded by whether they have a blind spot for loco hauled rakes or not!

Ah yes, hourly TPE to Newcastle seems reasonable to me.

In terms of the mk 5's, I would just advocate rearranging the seats so that more have a window.

Scrapping seems to be a waste.
 

YorksLad12

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2020
Messages
1,875
Location
Leeds
Doncaster - York is about twenty minutes (there are obviously no intermediate stops)

Doncaster - Leeds is about thirty minutes, Leeds - York is about thirty minutes, so assuming you can get paths that match up each side of Leeds, and don't have a long dwell at Leeds itself, you're talking a time penalty of around forty minutes for running (London) Doncaster - Leeds - York (Newcastle) - I can't see who would benefit from that kind of service (other than first thing/ last thing in the day, when there's maybe not enough demand to warrant a London - Leeds service and a London - Newcastle service, but combining them might be a way of making a service viable - but that was more of a British Rail era solution for fringe services, the ECML is busy enough for Leeds and Newcastle services to be separate IMHO
I never said it was practical. Remember where we are ;)

Ah yes, hourly TPE to Newcastle seems reasonable to me.

In terms of the mk 5's, I would just advocate rearranging the seats so that more have a window.

Scrapping seems to be a waste.
Amen! Or just rearranging them so that the tables all line up with the windows would be nice.

Elsewhere: there's now a 7 minute wait for southbound XC services at Leeds, which have effectively swapped departures with the southbound LNER service at that part of the hour. On the other half hour... well. The LNER service departs at xx40 instead of xx45, but I think the Sheffield stopper via the faster route still leaves at xx48. So could we see Leeds-Westgate-Sheffield at last, say at xx44? What would it bump in to south of Westgate?
 

43074

Established Member
Joined
10 Oct 2012
Messages
2,003
You've just reminded me: at the end of the TPE document somewhere it mentions the Leeds-Westgate-Sheffield service. Interestingly, the other two services it mentions could be considered TPE services... are they putting in a bid to run the oft-delayed service instead of Northern?
That list also includes the Ashington service which is not going to be part of TPE, I think they have just tailored a generic industry briefing document (possibly written by NR?)
southern end of the ECML - I certainly don't like trains running non-stop through Doncaster (though it's understandable on the Aberdeen/Inverness services) - there are a lot of links there (and I'll declare an interest in having made many connections there over the years!)
I think I would say the same about Peterborough for connections from Anglia and the southern end of Lincolnshire for customers travelling north, possibly more so than Doncaster where an XC alternative exists for likes of Edinburgh/Newcastle to South Yorkshire, even Grimsby (for arguments sake) to London has an alternative route via Lincoln.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
That list also includes the Ashington service which is not going to be part of TPE, I think they have just tailored a generic industry briefing document (possibly written by NR?)
Yes, there’s definitely a “common core text” to all the consultations, as anexample the GN version has exactly the same text as others where it mentions splitting the Liverpool to Norwich service at Nottingham.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
A few things from scanning through the various pdfs...

* - The evening Chathill service won't stop at Cramlington, meaning quite a bit gap in the peaks for Newcastle - Cramington passengers (who will significantly outnumber the Chathill man and his dog!) - will the expectation be that the Ashington service covers this instead?

* -Still two short DMUs into Leeds in the morning peak from Skipton (rather than combining the Lancaster and Carlisle services to allow a path to be used by a four coach EMU) - I wasn't expecting anything to change, but it's still annoying

* -Seems a bit odd to be removing the token "put the place on the map" LNER service that Sunderland has to London at the same time as giving Middlesbrough/ Cleethorpes a token "put the place on the map" LNER service to London (I appreciate the reasons for both changes, but the timing of doing one at the same time as the other seems worth pointing out)

* -I thought Reston was a daft idea for a station when it was proposed, I thought it was a daft idea when they started building it, I think it's a daft idea now that we see just how poor the service is going to be / how we'll have to allocate stock to a stand alone service just to provide enough services to justify opening it - it's going to be a white elephant

* -Saltburn gets an hourly Manchester service - great - more people should visit Saltburn - the other east coast seaside towns are over-rated!

* - In all of the rationalisations (and complaints about insufficient paths through Garforth for the current XC service at tea time!), I'm surprised that the Blackpool North service still runs fairly fast to York (okay, it picks up Garforth in lieu of TPE, but there's still the stand along Leeds - York stopper - given all of the other reductions/ simplifications, I half expected the stops to be giving back to the Blackpool service, as used to be the case)

I still like the overall changes, don't get me wrong - there's a lot of good in there - obviously there'll be something in there that everyone dislikes

Ah yes, hourly TPE to Newcastle seems reasonable to me.

In terms of the mk 5's, I would just advocate rearranging the seats so that more have a window.

Scrapping seems to be a waste.

I don't think there's talk of scrapping them, but if TPE can manage the vast majority of their current services without them then they can become someone else's problem (which may allow us to take these modern coaches out of service for a few months so that money can be spent on reconfiguring them)

I never said it was practical. Remember where we are ;)

Sure, I was just trying to see if there was any quantifiable benefit of it, that's all - going via Leeds is enough of a delay on Sheffield - York journeys but even more so with (London) Doncaster - York (Newcastle) journeys

I think I would say the same about Peterborough for connections from Anglia and the southern end of Lincolnshire for customers travelling north, possibly more so than Doncaster where an XC alternative exists for likes of Edinburgh/Newcastle to South Yorkshire, even Grimsby (for arguments sake) to London has an alternative route via Lincoln.

Fair call - I'm more biased in favour of Donny for obvious reasons, but there's obviously a lot of connections at Peterborough too
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top