What's the point of the Harrogate-London LNER service?

[TUC]

How long would you allow if changing trains and on an advance ticket for both legs? Now be elderly, or carrying luggage, or travelling with children… The attraction of a through train is that it is exactly that. Speed isn’t everyone’s be-all-and-end-all.

I want both. I absolutely get the benefits of through trains, but neither do I want to be on a train standing on a platform for 15 minutes.

 

[dk1]

The line between York and Knaresborough is single tracked. Fitting in the half-hourly Northern service is tricky enough, as one delay has a knock-on effect across the line. Fitting in a LNER service would be even harder, with the service not being much quicker than the Northern service, due to it needing to frequently stop in passing places.

Yes the plan was I believe mooted before the Knaresborough-York section went half-hourly. Would be hideously unreliable and probably not possible now.

 

[TUC]

What is more puzzling is what is the appeal of LNER services which operate beyond Leeds, but which include a long wait in Leeds itself? For example, the 1803 Kings Cross-Skipton service arrives in Leeds at 2021, but then does not depart for Skipton until 2039. I'm all for smaller towns having through services, but surely that length of wait wipes out a lot of the benefit?

As an example of how long a wait this is, I've been travelling on this service from King's Cross-Leeds tonight, to change there for Halifax. At Leeds I've been through the barriers,visited Boots and Sainsbury's at the station, and also Tesco several streets away. I've just got back to the station and the Skipton train is still there.

 

[JonathanH]

I've just got back to the station and the Skipton train is still there.

Is the Skipton train one of those where the catering staff have to get all their equipment off in the time between it arriving and departing from Leeds?

 

[urbophile]

Are the trains serving Harrogate bi-modes? If not it would be scandalous for diesel trans to be spending most of their journey under the wires. Surely there is a strong case for electrifying Leeds-Harrogate and probably through to York. Stronger than Leeds to Skipton and Ilkley which happened years ago.

 

[brad465]

RailwayData results for Harrogate have London Kings Cross as the third highest destination for its passengers; while well behind Leeds and York, the 88k approx. going to London is almost double that of fourth in the list. This would suggest the case is strong for the service's existence.

 

[Gwr12345]

Are the trains serving Harrogate bi-modes? If not it would be scandalous for diesel trans to be spending most of their journey under the wires. Surely there is a strong case for electrifying Leeds-Harrogate and probably through to York. Stronger than Leeds to Skipton and Ilkley which happened years ago.

Yes they are, run on electric to Leeds and then run on diesel fron there to Harrogate. LNER don't generally operate under the wires now

 

[A S Leib]

RailwayData results for Harrogate have London Kings Cross as the third highest destination for its passengers; while well behind Leeds and York, the 88k approx. going to London is almost double that of fourth in the list. This would suggest the case is strong for the service's existence.

Especially because it provides a higher-capacity service to the highest destination.

 

[snowball]

GCHQ have locations in and around Harrogate
They will need trains to London

Menwith Hill is NSA with an RAF label, so perhaps needs a direct service to Washington.

 

[30907]

Is the Skipton train one of those where the catering staff have to get all their equipment off in the time between it arriving and departing from Leeds?

Possibly, but there's a pathing issue - Skipton and Ilkley stoppers leaving when the LNER would be ready.

 

[dk1]

Are the trains serving Harrogate bi-modes? If not it would be scandalous for diesel trans to be spending most of their journey under the wires. Surely there is a strong case for electrifying Leeds-Harrogate and probably through to York. Stronger than Leeds to Skipton and Ilkley which happened years ago.

It didn’t seem to matter with IC125 sets for 40+ years, but yes, they are bimode now.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

It didn’t seem to matter with IC125 sets for 40+ years, but yes, they are bimode now.

There was a spell when the evening service was run by Mk4 sets with 47s operating north of Leeds. On arrival at Harrogate they ran ecs to Neville Hill via York rather than running round.

 

[dk1]

There was a spell when the evening service was run by Mk4 sets with 47s operating north of Leeds. On arrival at Harrogate they ran ecs to Neville Hill via York rather than running round.

I remember being dragged from Bradford/Shipley to/from Leeds on 91/Mk4 sets on several occasions.

 

[David Bullock]

It’s worth noting on the “why Harrogate and not anywhere with a higher population in Yorkshire” question that LNERs intention is to have a Bradford Forster square extension on alternating hours to the Harrogate once the new platform is built.

So in a two hour period you’d have
KGX-LDS
KGX-HGT
KGX-LDS
KGX-BDQ

 

[norbitonflyer]

The Lincoln service seems to be lobbying by Visit Lincoln and the county council. With regards to wealth take a look at the cars parked up in Newark North Gate station most of the week.

Unlike changing at Leeds for Harrogate, Newark North Gate has never had facilities adequate for the volume of passengers who needed to change there, and the infrequent ECML calls there made reliable connections difficult to arrange (holding the London train to await a connection would delay following services, so the feeder trains were timed early, leaving a very long wait)
Lincoln was, for many years, the only county town other than Oakham {Rutland) in mainland England not to have a regular London service. Shrewsbury now has that dubious honour.

 

[A S Leib]

Lincoln was, for many years, the only county town other than Oakham {Rutland) in mainland England not to have a regular London service. Shrewsbury now has that dubious honour.

Although Trowbridge's London service is very limited, and whilst Cambridge is still the county town, Alconbury, the current site of the county council, doesn't have a railway station at all. I think Derbyshire CC's based in Matlock and Nottingham in West Bridgford since Derby and Nottingham became unitary authorities. Cumbria still exists as a ceremonial county, but with the new Westmorland and Furness Council, I think it's a bit more important again; is Oxenholme station close enough to say it has a London service?

Closer to being on topic, Ripon's one of the few cities without a railway station at all, and they'd probably be displeased with Harrogate losing its London services.

 

[Nottingham59]

Well obviously, but there are plenty of other places with far higher populations in Yorkshire (Barnsley, Huddersfield etc) with no such connection. It just seems like an odd service to exist

Have a look at the flow statistics on

Labs - Flow Statistics - Harrogate

Harrogate has around five times as many passengers travelling to London every day as does Huddersfield. And even more than from Barnsley.

There are a number of towns in the UK that have an outsize passenger flows to London. York is one. Crewe is another. Edinburgh has three times the flow to London compared to Glasgow, despite having a smaller population. Greater Manchester exceeds Liverpool City Region.

I don't have the figures, but I bet these flows also have a higher proportion of first class passengers and premium paying peak-time travellers on expenses.

The effect is self-reinforcing of course. Places are desirable because they have fast links to London. People choose to live there because they have business in London occasionally. So train operating companies grow those services rather than growing, say, direct connections from Barnsley to London.

 

[YorksLad12]

Have a look at the flow statistics on

Labs - Flow Statistics - Harrogate

Harrogate has around five times as many passengers travelling to London every day as does Huddersfield. And even more than from Barnsley.

Yes, but Harrogate has direct services to London; Huddersfield and Barnsley don't. That's the problem with this thread, there are arguments for and against that can't be proven either way...

Personally I'd stick with peak-time extensions from Leeds, but more of them. I caught an LNER service from Horsforth to Leeds last month... from what I saw, we could have all fitted into one Standard Class coach.

 

[Gerald Fiennes]

To add to the mix: the last transport minister but c. 8 was the MP for Harrogate, who had narrowly won back the seat from the Lib Dems in c.2015.

It would certainly would be worth running a few directs in the peaks from Harrogate to KGX, but two-hourly does seem a little excessive, particularly given the long waits at Leeds. But since a decade ago, the rolliing stock on Harrogate - Leeds has improved (to C195s) and, strategically, it would surely be better to improve the connection facilities, ie. waiting facilities, airside catering options at a number of LNER stations to the branches rather than try and run so many directs? Eg. at York for Middlesbrough? Grantham for Lincoln.

 

[A S Leib]

Eg. at York for Middlesbrough? Grantham for Lincoln.

I think the majority of EMR Lincoln – Newark services go to Castle, not Northgate, and Lincoln – Grantham's 12,000 journeys per year, more than Lincoln to Doncaster or Manchester, so sending telling all London-bound passengers to go via Sleaford wouldn't always work.

 

[norbitonflyer]

would surely be better to improve the connection facilities, ie. waiting facilities, airside catering options at a number of LNER stations to the branches rather than try and run so many directs? Eg. at York for Middlesbrough? Grantham for Lincoln.

Granthams facilities would be quite adequate for interchange passengers. But sadly it ceased to be the interchange for Lincoln in 1966. Now you have to change at Newark, Peterborough (my preference) or Retford (for which they have the cheek to charge extra)

 

[Ianigsy]

The Horsforth call is very convenient for quite a large swathe of north Leeds and the outlying area.

Even if the extension isn’t carrying that many passengers, they’re people who aren’t driving into Leeds or using the Northern locals.

 

[skyhigh]

the rolliing stock on Harrogate - Leeds has improved (to C195s)

There is no booked 195 work to Harrogate, it is entirely 15x/170 operated.

 

[MontyP]

The Horsforth call is very convenient for quite a large swathe of north Leeds and the outlying area.

Even if the extension isn’t carrying that many passengers, they’re people who aren’t driving into Leeds or using the Northern locals.

Of course they are useful to the people that use them, but the key question is surely whether the rolling stock could be of equal or greater use to a larger number of people by adding additional capacity onto the core LNER routes. Or even being redeployed onto other operators where there is a shortage of stock.

 

[jamiearmley]

Of course they are useful to the people that use them, but the key question is surely whether the rolling stock could be of equal or greater use to a larger number of people by adding additional capacity onto the core LNER routes. Or even being redeployed onto other operators where there is a shortage of stock.

Given that the lab figures quoted in a post above showed 242 pax per day from Harrogate to London, - which isn't even enough to fill a 170 unit - and the five car Azuma has 302 seats -, and assuming that all London passengers use the direct service (they don't) - that's less than 50 people per train. Quite often 10 car units make their way up to Harrogate as well.

When you strip out the proportion who use the local service, the number actually using the direct services to access London becomes smaller.

Although this post does not attempt such, it would seem to be fairly easy to construct an argument that the stock and crews would be better utilised elsewhere.

However....

 

[bramling]

Of course they are useful to the people that use them, but the key question is surely whether the rolling stock could be of equal or greater use to a larger number of people by adding additional capacity onto the core LNER routes. Or even being redeployed onto other operators where there is a shortage of stock.

Is LNER particularly short of capacity? Most of their services are 9 or 10 cars long, and (apart from Lincoln) those that aren’t generally seem to be diagrammed as 5-car specifically because that’s all the demand warrants, rather than because stock isn’t available.

Do take the point about potential redeployment elsewhere though. GWR being the obvious one. Though, realistically, ditching Harrogate isn’t going to free up much.

 

[800001]

Given that the lab figures quoted in a post above showed 242 pax per day from Harrogate to London, - which isn't even enough to fill a 170 unit - and the five car Azuma has 302 seats -, and assuming that all London passengers use the direct service (they don't) - that's less than 50 people per train. Quite often 10 car units make their way up to Harrogate as well.

When you strip out the proportion who use the local service, the number actually using the direct services to access London becomes smaller.

Although this post does not attempt such, it would seem to be fairly easy to construct an argument that the stock and crews would be better utilised elsewhere.

However....

The only time a 10 car is diagrammed to Harrogate is on a Saturday to Sunday maybe one service, hardly ‘quite often’.

 

[jamiearmley]

The only time a 10 car is diagrammed to Harrogate is on a Saturday to Sunday maybe one service, hardly ‘quite often’.

That is true.

However, using Friday as an example, 3 services were 5 car and 5 were 9 car.

80% of services today are 9 car.

I've not spotted a 10 car looking at those two days.

9 cars is still resource which could be used elsewhere - if they stopped mucking about with Harrogate, Bradford and others, they could perhaps do away with the need to replace the 225 sets and just retire them instead.

Don't get me wrong - I'll be crying the day that the 225s retire - but it would save a lot of taxpayer money.

 

[MontyP]

That is true.

However, using Friday as an example, 3 services were 5 car and 5 were 9 car.

80% of services today are 9 car.

I've not spotted a 10 car looking at those two days.

9 cars is still resource which could be used elsewhere - if they stopped mucking about with Harrogate, Bradford and others, they could perhaps do away with the need to replace the 225 sets and just retire them instead.

Don't get me wrong - I'll be crying the day that the 225s retire - but it would save a lot of taxpayer money.

This discussion reminds me of the early days of the IC125 timetable on the ECML in the late 70s/early 80s. There were several extensions to both Harrogate and Bradford (including unbelievably a service to Bradford that used the Wortley Curve to bypass Leeds) as well as 2 or 3 to Hull. These were all cut back to allow more frequent services to Newcastle and Edinburgh, leaving the extensions to Bradford/Harrogate in marginal time only, and the Hull service once per day (which it still is today on LNER, at almost exactly the same times as 40 years ago).

 

[Johnny Lewis]

Just for info. I'm currently on board the 17.36 Harrogate to London King's Cross service. 62 passengers on board departing Harrogate (6 in First Class). About 20-25 were already at Harrogate ahead of the previous Northern departure to Leeds (17.16) and didn't board the Northern service, thus implying they are travelling LNER beyond Leeds). Quite a few passengers with luggage, also suggesting they're travelling beyond Leeds. Unfortunately the electronic seat reservations haven't been switched on. Of course, 62 passengers will fit comfortably into one carriage of a 150, 158 or 170...

The train is also advertised (on the Azuma CIS) to stop at Horsforth, despite It being a "pick up only" stop in the timetable, so in theory, no-one should get off there...3 passengers did!

Another 12 passengers waiting at Horsforth, but I don't think they have all boarded. So probably a total of around 70 passengers on board as the train approaches Leeds.

Would there be more passengers if it were a Bradford - Shipley - Leeds - London service...?

The worst thing about the Harrogate - London direct services is that too many of them are only 5 car trains and are not strengthened between Leeds and London (despite there being sufficient time in the schedule to couple another unit at Leeds). A 5 car train between Leeds and London is usually pretty cosy, no matter what time of day it is, and this train is still a commuter service for passengers travelling back from Leeds (departing 18.15) to Wakefield, Doncaster and possibly even Grantham.

Not sure if my post answers the OP's original question, but adds a bit of context.