Avanti West Coast Withdraws Shrewsbury Service From June 2024

Topological · 24 Feb 2024

So many conflicting arguments.

Maybe Shrewsbury would do better with a train that was off-peak, therefore not attracting the fares being discussed here? Maybe the flows are to Shrewsbury and then the peak issue is only Birmingham and some sensible splitting can be done to keep flexibility? My own take would be that the timing is the only one that works and the service is just not designed for those other markets.

Whilst peak services are prohibitively expensive, they are the time when the railways make money to subsidise lower fares for off peak. I dont see that bringing off peak fares into peak times will help much.

As an aside, there don't ever seem to be peak restrictions on TfW over the Marches and operating through Shrewsbury, at least it is the same fare to go from Swansea to Manchester all day (and that encounters Cardiffs peak as well as others no doubt).

The railways really should be making sure there is capacity on Wolverhampton/Birmingham to London and then the connections between Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton/Birmingham. That would make sure that Shrewsbury was well connected south.

RailUK Forums

Bald Rick · 25 Feb 2024

jagardner1984 said:
and were trying to get to Brum for a fairly normal “half term activity starting time” of 10am - which I would have thought would be against the main flow going into London.

There’s a main flow into Birmingham for that time, too. The Avanti services are busy throughout, and routinely full and standing from Coventry.

jagardner1984 said:
The cost in the end was around a quarter tank of fuel,

That‘s impressive for 200+ miles!

jagardner1984 said:
I’m of the opinion we should build sufficient railways, subsidise them and tax road use such that rail travel (and coach etc) is always and obviously the financially prudent choice.

Well that’s the rub. There is loads of spare capacity on the railways, just not necessarily at the times and places that are when people want to travel. If we were to build a system that had sufficient capacity for all potential trips at all times, we‘d need something like an 8 track ECML to Scotland, which would be largely unused 99% of the time. (I exaggerate, slightly, to make the point - smoothing demand to fill capacity is the key to an efficient transport system).

dk1 · 25 Feb 2024

Topological said:
So many conflicting arguments.

Maybe Shrewsbury would do better with a train that was off-peak, therefore not attracting the fares being discussed here? Maybe the flows are to Shrewsbury and then the peak issue is only Birmingham and some sensible splitting can be done to keep flexibility? My own take would be that the timing is the only one that works and the service is just not designed for those other markets.

Whilst peak services are prohibitively expensive, they are the time when the railways make money to subsidise lower fares for off peak. I dont see that bringing off peak fares into peak times will help much.

Trouble is it seems the Shrewsbury service runs in marginal time when the 805s wouldn’t have any other duties. Running them through during the day wouldn’t be possible or cost effective.

43066 · 25 Feb 2024

jagardner1984 said:
I think we sometimes underestimate what a disincentive that initial pricing may be to some passengers. I’m of the opinion we should build sufficient railways, subsidise them and tax road use such that rail travel (and coach etc) is always and obviously the financially prudent choice. Not every passenger is as ticket savvy as some RailUK people (and I’m very glad for lots of the advice I’ve picked up here !).

Is it not the case that Avanti’s services are regularly full and standing? Most long distance operators are extremely busy, patronised by a mix of those who are flexible enough to buy advances, those who shop around, and those who simply pay through the nose.

The reality is the current government isn’t willing to expand capacity (see HS2) so, if that approach continues, we are going to be left with a busier and more expensive railway, where high fares increasingly have to be used to regulate demand. Withdrawal of the Shrewsbury service (and others) to free up scarce stock for busier routes is an inevitable part of that process, and we can expect to see more of the same.

dk1 · 25 Feb 2024

43066 said:
The reality is the current government isn’t willing to expand capacity (see HS2) so, if that approach continues, we are going to be left with a busier and more expensive railway, where high fares increasingly have to be used to regulate demand.

Which is exactly what BR used to do. Charge what the market will bear & increase fares or reduce availability of saver/super-saver tickets to dampen demand.

stevieinselby · 25 Feb 2024

robspaceman said:
It’s generally accepted that subsidy is a ‘public good’ on some loss making rail routes, eg the central wales line and the Cambrian coast would I'm sure soon be culled if it weren’t for subsidy. But this is just for a basic stopping service of course.

Does this (unwritten?) rule of the railway exist only for branch lines and a basic service, or does it exist anywhere in terms of a direct London ‘express’ service? (Ie a decent direct London service being seen as a public good for population centres of a certain size, even if the route is loss making and without it people would still be able to get to London via a connection).

In general, I would say that subsidy is unlikely to be appropriate for services that duplicate existing services, unless it is only a marginal subsidy and the service provides a particular public good, or it is pump prime funding to get a service started that there is good reason to believe will become commercially viable in the longer term.

With the very limited gains from providing one or two through services to London, the high cost per passenger and the repeated failure to make it into a sustainable service, it's hard to justify any subsidy for the route. The journey can be made easily with a single change, and there are typically two or three journey opportunities per hour that are quicker than the direct service.

Energy · 25 Feb 2024

stevieinselby said:
The journey can be made easily with a single change, and there are typically two or three journey opportunities per hour that are quicker than the direct service.

Someone must have fought hard within the DfT or Avanti to keep it till WMR went 2tph. It's an obvious one to chop given how unprofitable it was on a route which can be so easily done with a change.

The £1.4m loss for 60 passengers a day equates to ~£60 per passenger per day...

A S Leib · 25 Feb 2024

Energy said:
It's an obvious one to chop given how unprofitable it was on a route which can be so easily done with a change.

Yes; to get to Euston it only means leaving Shrewsbury thirteen minutes earlier than now (06:51 vs 07:04) and then a nine minute connection at Wolverhampton. There aren't any arrivals at Shrewsbury between 06:51 and 07:04. That might be slightly annoying if the 06:46 arrivals from Crewe or Cardiff are delayed, but I'd guess that most passengers from Nantwich, Prees etc. to London go via Crewe anyway.

hux385 · 26 Feb 2024

I wonder if the curtailed Shrewsburys will become Pendolino or 805/807s in the future since there is now no requirement for diesel traction? Would this allow some of the Voyagers to transfer to XC in June?

Deafdoggie · 26 Feb 2024

43066 said:
Is it not the case that Avanti’s services are regularly full and standing?

Not between Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton, no.

Bletchleyite · 26 Feb 2024

Deafdoggie said:
Not between Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton, no.

It was quite busy including standees when I used it once on a Saturday. On weekdays it's an Anytime train so unlikely to be very busy. So there's demand but only at the budget price level.

AJDesiro · 26 Feb 2024

hux385 said:
I wonder if the curtailed Shrewsburys will become Pendolino or 805/807s in the future since there is now no requirement for diesel traction? Would this allow some of the Voyagers to transfer to XC in June?

805s/807s, the paths are already in. The Euston-Birmingham that stops at Rugby, MK and Watford is almost always going to be run by 80x when they come into play.

Kite159 · 27 Feb 2024

Bletchleyite said:
It was quite busy including standees when I used it once on a Saturday. On weekdays it's an Anytime train so unlikely to be very busy. So there's demand but only at the budget price level.

But how many of those passengers alighted at either Wolverhampton or Birmingham and were simply using the next available service (one which is semifast and starts at Shrewsbury rather than gambling with a 2 coach 150 from Holyhead which arrives F&S)

JW4 · 27 Feb 2024

LowLevel said:
There's not going to be a several hour gap in the local service - it'll appear at some point, it's only the first cut in RTT

19:52, 20:26 and 21:37 departures from BHM have now been added for WMR

ChrisDY10 · 29 Feb 2024

JW4 said:
19:52, 20:26 and 21:37 departures from BHM have now been added for WMR

Only on a Saturday I believe - so still not showing for Mondays to Fridays

ValleyLines142 · 1 Mar 2024

TheGrew said:
Yeah, I have been on the Blackpool services a few times between Euston and Warrington and the loadings have been good (all via Trent Valley). Generally, I think that most people on the Glasgow services out of Euston are aiming for stations up to Preston, and therefore the Blackpools act as useful peak-time extras. Blackpool is a more convenient place to turn a train than Preston.

The Blackpool services go via Birmingham, not via the Trent Valley.

dk1 · 1 Mar 2024

ValleyLines142 said:
The Blackpool services go via Birmingham, not via the Trent Valley.

Except the 05:35 ex-Blackpool & 17:05 ex-Euston (SX) which operate via the Trent Valley.

ValleyLines142 · 1 Mar 2024

dk1 said:
Except the 05:35 ex-Blackpool & 17:05 ex-Euston (SX) which operate via the Trent Valley.

Didn't realise that - I stand corrected.

Regarding Shrewsbury, I did observe the morning portion arrive into Birmingham from Shrewsbury one day this week, but part of me wonders whether that was just regular commuters to Birmingham and not through traffic to London.

dk1 · 1 Mar 2024

ValleyLines142 said:
Didn't realise that - I stand corrected.

Regarding Shrewsbury, I did observe the morning portion arrive into Birmingham from Shrewsbury one day this week, but part of me wonders whether that was just regular commuters to Birmingham and not through traffic to London.

I would imagine they are a good percentage of the loadings.

Sid Edwards · 4 Mar 2024

I

Llanigraham said:
I've used it twice and the loadings were miniscule!
And as has been said, it was quicker staying on the Cambrian service to New St and changing there.

In the nineteen eighties with loco hauled stock Euston to Shrewsbury was two hourly most of the day with one even starting at Chester (ECS from Edgehill) and one working from Aberystwyth each morning plus their return workings in the evening.

Happy days when I think the class 47s for the non electric portion interworked with Euston to Holyhead workings and the Shrewsbury to York mail train on a 48 hour cycle.

Bald Rick · 4 Mar 2024

Sid Edwards said:
I

In the nineteen eighties with loco hauled stock Euston to Shrewsbury was two hourly most of the day with one even starting at Chester (ECS from Edgehill) and one working from Aberystwyth each morning plus their return workings in the evening.

Happy days when I think the class 47s for the non electric portion interworked with Euston to Holyhead workings and the Shrewsbury to York mail train on a 48 hour cycle.

For the Aberystwyt, wasn’t there a horrendous double shunt at Shrewsbury to split the train into a smaller portion, plus shift the buffet car (and DVT?) around that had a rather ambitious 11 minutes in the timetable to do it?

victormildrew · 5 Mar 2024

I think Avanti have got a nerve withdrawing this service from Shrewsbury and blaminig passenger numbers, the one and only service was cancelled more times than it ran. Yesterday cancelled both directions, today ran this morning but cancelled at Wolverhampton tonight.
Is it no wonder that the passengers that did use it have found alternitive trains as this train could not be relied upon.

AlanL · 5 Mar 2024

victormildrew said:
I think Avanti have got a nerve withdrawing this service from Shrewsbury and blaminig passenger numbers, the one and only service was cancelled more times than it ran. Yesterday cancelled both directions, today ran this morning but cancelled at Wolverhampton tonight.
Is it no wonder that the passengers that did use it have found alternitive trains as this train could not be relied upon.

Completely agree - there's more to this than meets the eye, especially with a new open access company suddenly appearing! Avant have perhaps been 'instructed ' to run the route down?

steve099 · 5 Mar 2024

As someone who is being forced to drive to Stafford from Shrewsbury because of the poor timings of the trains from Shrewsbury to Birmingham in the morning peak and in part due to the retiming of the direct service from 6.39am to 7.04am (dare I mention the horiffic difference in the cost), there is the further consideration that our fragmented railways creates a poor business case for through services. My peaktime train getting on at Stafford was near empty until Tamworth from Liverpool through to Euston, but no-one would suggest curtailing a WCML train so early. While operational reasons may necessitate shorter workings and the intensity you may want to work particular rolling stock influence service patterns, if the WMR Shrews to Brum semi-fast was replaced by an extended Avanti service beyond Wolves from London, this direct service would have a different cost to that quoted. Every future-looking document I've read on the Shrews-Wolves line speaks of an ambition for more through trains to London post-HS2... so this seems short-sighted if we are wanting to take people off the roads and encourage regional growth..

And also, as above, the reliability was shocking. I can guarantee that with so few direct services, a big driver of the rationale for Shrews/Wellington/Telford to London travellers choosing the direct service was because it was direct, not explicltly because the timing was their perfect choice. And Avanti gave little regard for maintaining its directness, happy to turf you off short or cancel altogether, negating the premium cost which often wasn't made up by Delay Repay.

Deafdoggie · 6 Mar 2024

victormildrew said:
I think Avanti have got a nerve withdrawing this service from Shrewsbury and blaminig passenger numbers, the one and only service was cancelled more times than it ran. Yesterday cancelled both directions, today ran this morning but cancelled at Wolverhampton tonight.
Is it no wonder that the passengers that did use it have found alternitive trains as this train could not be relied upon.

AlanL said:
Completely agree - there's more to this than meets the eye, especially with a new open access company suddenly appearing! Avant have perhaps been 'instructed ' to run the route down?

It's not a new thing that the service loses money hand over fist. BR had grand plans for the service, but the ticket sales never materialised. Virgin had grand plans for the same service (Albeit slightly less ambitious, some might argue more realistic) and they too failed at it. An open access operator had a go at it and ran out of money. It's no surprise Avanti can't do it either.
Just how much money do you keep throwing at a loss making service? A journey that's still possible, but with a change of train. There isn't a money-tree that can be harvested to keep a through train to London going. At some point someone says enough is enough, we can't waste any more money on this

YorkRailFan · 6 Mar 2024

RMT Press Office

Rail union RMT, has called on Mark Harper to reverse the Avanti train service cuts which will mean there will be no direct train between Shrewsbury and London from June 2024.

The damaging decision has been taken according to Avanti to “reduce public subsidy and put the railway on a more sustainable financial footing.”

However, the publicly subsised company has paid out more than £24m in dividends to shareholders in the last two years.

In a letter to Mr Harper, RMT general secretary Mick Lynch writes:

I am writing to register RMT’s opposition to Avanti West Coast’s plans to withdraw the daily service between Euston and Shrewsbury from June 2024 and to call on you to reverse this short-sighted and damaging decision.

The Government has attempted to justify this decision by stating that few passengers use these services, yet, nationally rail passenger numbers are increasing, and research recently published by the Rail Industry Association (RIA) found that rail passenger numbers could double by 2050, and that even under the lowest growth scenario, passenger numbers are forecast to grow by more than a third.1 Rather than cutting vital services, the Government should be introducing measures to increase demand.

The Shropshire Chamber of Commerce has called for the decision to be reversed and highlights that ‘the discontinuation of this service risks isolating Shropshire businesses from the growth potential having a direct connection to the capital brings' and is ‘damaging to the local economy’.

Cutting services is completely at odds with the UK’s climate change targets, and requiring passengers to change services will undoubtedly deter passengers from rail and push more people into cars. Unfathomably, at a time when the Government should be supporting modal shift to rail, this decision would make Shropshire one of only two counties in England without a direct train service to London.

Avanti’s correspondence to us on this matter states that the decision has been made to “reduce public subsidy and put the railway on a more sustainable financial footing” which is frankly laughable given that in the last two years the company has paid out more than £24m in dividends, all funded from public money. This is just the latest example of Avanti putting passengers before profit and the Government’s complicity in this.

The planned service cuts are of even more concerning when considering that Avanti is already running significantly fewer services than when it took over the franchise. When Avanti took on the service, it was running on average around 8000 services per period and had promised a further 263 per week by 2022, which would have equated to around 9000 services per period. Yet, between September 2023 and January 2024, Avanti planned just 6370 services per period on average.

Of course, even fewer trains actually ran as a result of numerous cancellations.

Furthermore, the fact that there has been no public consultation over the planned service cuts just reinforces the disdain that is being shown to passengers yet again.

Ultimately, the decision to withdraw the Euston to Shrewsbury service is damaging for passengers, the economy and the environment. Therefore, I am calling on you to urgently reverse the decision to withdraw the Avanti Euston-Shrewsbury service, and instead commit to ensuring these services are permanently protected.

RMT urges Transport Secretary to reverse Shrewsbury to London service cut

Rail union RMT, has called on Mark Harper to reverse the Avanti train service cuts which will mean there will be no direct train between Shrewsbury and London from June 2024.

www.rmt.org.uk

RMT General Secretary Mick Lynch has written to Mark Harper over the proposal to scrap Avanti's Shrewsbury-London service asking Harper and Avanti to not cut said service. In my opinion, the best outcome would be the service remains and the promised increase on the WMR service is delivered as well.

Energy · 6 Mar 2024

YorkRailFan said:
RMT urges Transport Secretary to reverse Shrewsbury to London service cut

Rail union RMT, has called on Mark Harper to reverse the Avanti train service cuts which will mean there will be no direct train between Shrewsbury and London from June 2024.

www.rmt.org.uk

RMT General Secretary Mick Lynch has written to Mark Harper over the proposal to scrap Avanti's Shrewsbury-London service asking Harper and Avanti to not cut said service. In my opinion, the best outcome would be the service remains and the promised increase on the WMR service is delivered as well.

Best for services is for both but for subsidy its very poor value for money.

The Avanti service averaged £60 per passenger per day subsidy, the money spent on it could be better spent elsewhere within the region.

AlanL · 6 Mar 2024

Energy said:
Best for services is for both but for subsidy its very poor value for money.

The Avanti service averaged £60 per passenger per day subsidy, the money spent on it could be better spent elsewhere within the region.

The actual reason numbers were not high recently is the huge number of cancellations on this route (the 18-16pm Avanti Euston-Shrewsbury has been cancelled or terminated at Wolverhampton virtually every day for the last month) and this totally unreliability is part of a 'managed decline' by the Dft/Avanti - No one is going to spend almost £200 on a peak return for such a poor service! A reliable, better timed and affordable direct train to London from Shrewsbury would be popular and would grow the market.

victormildrew · 6 Mar 2024

Totally agree with the above. Yet again the service from Shrewsbury this morning cancelled and said train will terminate at Birmingham New Street this evening.

dk1 · 6 Mar 2024

Several cancellations on Avanti routes again today due to crewing issues, although my trains with them have been spot on. Covering the Shrewsbury extensions from Wolverhampton will be a very low priority.

Avanti West Coast Withdraws Shrewsbury Service From June 2024

Member

RailUK Forums

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member