Two things:
1) planned use of the Dynamic Track Stabiliser, which enabled removal of some engineering allowances
2) completion of electrification to Doncaster / Leeds which removed further engineering allowances (and loads of diversions etc).
-
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!
Edinburgh-London rail journeys "to be cut to 4 hours"
- Thread starter diamond chap
- Start date
Two things:
1) planned use of the Dynamic Track Stabiliser, which enabled removal of some engineering allowances
2) completion of electrification to Doncaster / Leeds which removed further engineering allowances (and loads of diversions etc).
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
The WCML was briefly the best route London-Scotland, after electrification to Glasgow in 1974 (100 and eventually 110mph).
But that was soon overtaken by 125mph HSTs on the ECML in 1977.
Today, after WCRM and 125mph on the WCML, either route could deliver 4h journeys, but the BR/franchise system means the EC operator has the primary Edinburgh service, and the WC service to Edinburgh has to be indirect (via Birmingham).
There were a couple of occasions when the WC was best, they were during the Penmanshiel tunnel rebuild, and during the Iceland ash cloud saga when Virgin ran some non-stop Edinburgh-Euston trains to replace air services.
The closure/run-down of direct WC services to Stirling/Perth/Aberdeen/Inverness didn't help, so we have the direct Inverness service running to King's Cross these days.
The tilting WCML also means 390s are captive south of Glasgow/Edinburgh, though they could reach Stirling today.
Avanti's new 805s mean that through WCML trains beyond Glasgow/Edinburgh could again be feasible, but there seems no interest in running them.
The Open Access Stirling-Euston proposal might change the picture somewhat.
The ECML also carries XC services from Birmingham to Glasgow, despite the WCML route being much quicker.
It's worth saying that for a decade, the cancelled HS2 plans were intended to put the main service to Edinburgh on the Euston map, but that's a fantasy now, along with much else.
That plan required the Crewe-Manchester/Golborne route, and once the Golborne link was canned, it all fell apart.
The plan was to run a double HS2 set hourly to Carlisle and then split for Glasgow/Edinburgh.
Last edited:
TT-ONR-NRN
Established Member
Of note that Hull Trains had to lend them a set not too long ago, so I'll assume 803 availability has improved?
dk1
Veteran Member
Just seen that along with average journey times a little over 4hrs for the full route as opposed to 4h20.
Buzby
Member
It is an interesting proposal - but apart from some early kite-flying, once it became known the closest it got to a large conurbation (Motherwell) a large potential market lost interest. (Probably so as not to compete with AWC).
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,442
The LUMO press release about this proposal can be found by following the link in this thread:
Lumo plans to carry additional 275,000 passengers between London and Newcastle
Lumo press release LUMO PLANS TO CARRY ADDITIONAL 275,000 PASSENGERS BETWEEN LONDON AND NEWCASTLE Extra service could also lead to new jobs for Newcastle-based train operator Published 19 Jan 2024 Here at Lumo we're exploring plans to operate an additional return journey every day between...
www.railforums.co.uk
dk1
Veteran Member
H&I
Member
Reducing journey times is generally a good thing, but a balance needs to be struck with maintaining regional connectivity.
Hopefully this gets blocked again, but doubt it will. It's all good saving 5 minutes or so, but it's going to leave Northumberland with a pretty much unusable service connecting between places, not to mention the direct Morpeth to Metro Centre / Hexham services. SENRUG (South East Northumberland Rail User Group) and Northumberland County Council are not happy about it and the attacks are aimed at Transport For The North (Manchester) aswell, which isn't the first time either. Not to mention the electric power upgrades in Northumberland which have quietly been dropped aswell on the ECML.
Is anyone able to post them on here?Yes, quite a few people
Tilting saves only a handful of minutes from Lichfield to Glasgow.
If they do, they’ll be in trouble, as the timetable is not yet in formal development. There is a proposed specification, but until the formal development period is completed in the summer, the actual details are not certain.
notadriver
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 3,653
If you have luggage is the plane still faster than the train overall from Edinburgh centre to London centre?
Also will 185s have to use the slow line to thirsk instead of staying on fasts as they do now ?
Also will 185s have to use the slow line to thirsk instead of staying on fasts as they do now ?
It depends on your start and finish points. If your office is at King’s Cross, and you want to get to Princes St, then the train will be quicker!
Okay, thank you for your response ☺️
Trainbike46
Established Member
and similarly, if you work at Heathrow (other airports are available) and need to be at Edinburgh airport the plane will be quicker
Various assessments from points in Central-ish london to central edinburgh tend to find that there's barely any difference between the train and flying. The faster journey times proposed here will tip it in favour of the train for more journeys
agreed on all points.
AlbertBeale
Established Member
Though this assumes that speed is the clinching factor in deciding on mode of travel. For lots of people there are more important considerations.
Trainbike46
Established Member
Absolutely agreed; I just meant that, on the issue of journey times (which is of course only one of the many things people consider when deciding how to travel), the reduction in journey times will lead to the train beating the plane more frequently than it did before.
Are the wider timetable proposals available to view in public domain? My understanding is that to keep Darlington 2TPH (Houchen?) Durham will only be served by an hourly Newcastle terminator. In the previous proposal they were to be 1.5 TPH each. Meaning no services north of Newcastle with LNER from Durham. Services north of Newcastle to be provided by Cross Country. Failing to see who this timetable change benefits.
Only really those who travel direct from KGX to EDB and EDB to KGX as far as I can tell.
I hope they offer a consultation on this like they have for the Stirling/Glasgow changes. 1 hourly at Durham is in line with current timetabling by the looks of things. What do you mean by 1.5tph? Is that like 2 one hour, 1 the next? If so, that'd be a service improvement for DHM as long as TPE and XC don't lose paths.
hexagon789
Veteran Member
The previous proposal was alternating Darlington and Durham in the Edinburgh semi-fasts. Equally I believe Berwick and Alnmouth were to alternate as well.
Class 170101
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 7,942
Where have you picked this up from?
Well now that Glasgow consultation is out, I guess Sunderland consultation can't be far behind. Hopefully they will also inform/consult if they (LNER) are planning to cease Durham services to the North and which stations to the South will no longer be connected.
TPE goes from 2 to 1 and XC 2 to 1.5. Granted they are not currently using these paths.
This would be a massive downgrade for Durham if it happens. Although, no surprises that Darlington would be looked after, given Teesside politics.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,442
Yet the REAL alliance keeps reporting the staged commissioning in linked articles in the relevant thread? Have you any recent evidence anything has been dropped?
Trainbike46
Established Member
Someone earlier on the thread said the changes weren't quite finalised yet, and that's why exact timings and stopping patterns aren't yet available.
If XC offers a regular connection Durham-North of Newcastle, why would it be a problem if there isn't an LNER one without changing at Newcastle?
Higher ticket prices on XC. Lack of competition. Lower service offering. Subjectively - the standard of rolling stock.
Questions over stopping patterns to the south if Durham is only on the Newcastle terminator. Looking forward to seeing proposed timetable.
This TfN document, Nov 2023, details their review and gives some detail of the proposed general service pattern in section 3.10;
"https://democracy.transportfortheno...st Coast Mainline December 2024 Timetable.pdf" .
The proposals were not supported by the North East group but TfN did approve the proposals at its meeting in December so they should be going ahead from Dec 2024 timetable, hence LNER issuing the consultation on removal of Glasgow/Stirling services. As always there are winners and losers in any timetable change however item 3.7 states;
It's in the latest SENRUG (South East Northumberland Rail User Group) press release for the new timetables.
Usually quite reliable for things in relation to the railway line between Berwick and Newcastle.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,442
But probably not in this case. Marshall Meadows SFC might be late, but it’s well in progress. Benton and Ulgham feeder stations entered service last year, and a number of other switching locations were also commissioned.