Birmingham-Manchester standalone service?

[Purple Orange]

What are the chances of the XC network being restored in the next 12-24 months? (And the 3rd London-Manchester service?) If it takes that long is it not better to allocate the surplus capacity to any other service type that requires the uplift now?

 

[Watershed]

What are the chances of the XC network being restored in the next 12

Nil.

-24 months?

5%

And the 3rd London-Manchester service?

10%

If it takes that long is it not better to allocate the surplus capacity to any other service type that requires the uplift now?

The 350/2s aren't off-lease yet. Not a single Aventra has entered passenger service on WMT so far.

 

[Bletchleyite]

10%

100%, you mean. The third London-Manchester is being restored in a few weeks' time.

 

[Philip]

Of the two routes to connect to Manchester, I'd say Bristol is most important.

I would say Reading and Oxford to Manchester are both bigger markets than Bristol and Cheltenham to Manchester.

 

[Ianno87]

I might be wrong, but I recall that 12.350 (or 5.Aventra) can't operate north of Northampton for various reasons. I've certainly never seen a 12 car not leave 4 behind at Northampton.

I've been on a 12-car that's made it to Coventry.

 

[cle]

I would say Reading and Oxford to Manchester are both bigger markets than Bristol and Cheltenham to Manchester.

Do we have stats for these? I'd be curious to know too.

The Reading route notably covers Coventry-Manchester, a larger city but smaller demand than Reading/Oxford. Plus Intl/Parkway considerations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would say Reading and Oxford to Manchester are both bigger markets than Bristol and Cheltenham to Manchester.

Are they bigger direct markets, though? Or do people consider it quicker/easier to travel via London for a more frequent (and less utterly rubbish, it being XC) service?

I'd certainly go via London for Manchester-Reading without even thinking about the XC option. Quite possibly cheaper, too.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

As a (near) Oxford resident I wouldn't think of going via London, to be honest, much though I dislike the experience of travelling on a busy Voyager.

NRE's suggested itineraries from Reading to Piccadilly are pretty much equal in time between XC (3hr08) and GWR+AWC (3hr14 upwards), so it's more of a judgement call there.

 

[Purple Orange]

Timing wise it’s marginally quicker via London, but that includes a 40 min transfer time between Euston & Paddington. I reckon that could be done in less time, but only relevant if there happens to be a train leaving in time from Paddington.

As a (near) Oxford resident I wouldn't think of going via London, to be honest, much though I dislike the experience of travelling on a busy Voyager.

NRE's suggested itineraries from Reading to Piccadilly are pretty much equal in time between XC (3hr08) and GWR+AWC (3hr14 upwards), so it's more of a judgement call there.

I’d go on the XC service in that case. Although post HS2 phase 1, it’ll be a no-brained to go via OOC.

 

[43096]

The price, basically. Abellio called the ROSCO's bluff, and the ROSCO lost.

You keep trotting this out, but the 172s - procured at the same time as the 350/2s from the same ROSCO so presumably with similar financing costs - are staying and not being replaced by extra 196s, which would be financed at similar rates to the Aventras. Has it, perhaps, more to do with getting a more viable number of Aventras into the order than just the Cross-City units?

 

[Grecian 1998]

IIRC, @Bald Rick has posted before on one of the numerous XC threads that appear in Speculative Ideas on an almost weekly basis that the power supply between Birmingham and Manchester isn't enough to allow an additional electric service (presumably 2 X 350) between those cities currently.

As a Bristol resident it wouldn't bother me in the slightest if the Manchester - Bristol service was split in two in the future, even though I usually make that journey a few times a year. Much as changing at New Street is a hassle, if it means there's adequate capacity and a half-hourly frequency on both legs, I'm all for it. I've got no problems with Voyagers if they're not overcrowded but pre-COVID it was much nicer if going to Liverpool changing onto a 350 if it had 2+2 seating.

In an ideal world Bristol should have a connection to the north-west but if cutting it will improve capacity north and south of Birmingham then that should be the priority.

That said I have no difficulty changing trains and I usually travel through Brum for leisure. Neither my circumstances nor my view will be shared by everyone.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

For me, it’s perhaps slightly easier.
- The Edinburgh service, assuming it will soon be the only XC north of York (see all relevant documents), will need to be 8 coaches. The only other logical 8 coach route south of Birmingham is Bournemouth, therefore that makes it an hourly Bournemouth to Edinburgh. As Southampton Airport has effectively collapsed anyway, it makes sense for them to get the connection to the North East and Scotland.
- The ‘slower’ service from Birmingham to Nottingham will soon be with WMT anyway, so that takes one Nottingham path out. Same applies to Leicester, which will also be WMT on an hourly slow service.
- Bristol starter XC should be a 4 car, and go to Nottingham. Stop also at Ashchurch, or Worcestershire Parkway, as required. Bristol is the regional hub, so it makes sense for Worcestershire Parkway to get that service. At the other end, to Nottingham.
- Cardiff starter XC should be a 5 car, to York.
- Plymouth starter could be a blended 5 and 8 car service to suit capacity at certain times. To Manchester using the Bordesley run.
- That leaves the additional service from Southampton or Reading, probably 4 or 5 car, which could easily run to Lime Street.

That leaves an option on an hourly Birmingham to Manchester electric, and an hourly Birmingham to Liverpool electric, both 8/350, probably using a special fleet of 350/3 and 350/4 in pairs with a trolley and an improved First Class. They could even start back from Coventry or International. You’d probably want a Galton Bridge stop for wider connections, Wolverhampton, Penkridge, Stafford. That Liverpool would be the Winsford and Hartford; the Manchester would be Stoke, Congleton, Macclesfield, Stockport.

Works for me, anyway. Makes more sense. But, the usual suspects will appear saying it can’t be done, but everything can be done if you accept timetables have to change.

 

[The Planner]

For me, it’s perhaps slightly easier.
- The Edinburgh service, assuming it will soon be the only XC north of York (see all relevant documents), will need to be 8 coaches. The only other logical 8 coach route south of Birmingham is Bournemouth, therefore that makes it an hourly Bournemouth to Edinburgh. As Southampton Airport has effectively collapsed anyway, it makes sense for them to get the connection to the North East and Scotland.
- The ‘slower’ service from Birmingham to Nottingham will soon be with WMT anyway, so that takes one Nottingham path out. Same applies to Leicester, which will also be WMT on an hourly slow service.
- Bristol starter XC should be a 4 car, and go to Nottingham. Stop also at Ashchurch, or Worcestershire Parkway, as required. Bristol is the regional hub, so it makes sense for Worcestershire Parkway to get that service. At the other end, to Nottingham.
- Cardiff starter XC should be a 5 car, to York.
- Plymouth starter could be a blended 5 and 8 car service to suit capacity at certain times. To Manchester using the Bordesley run.
- That leaves the additional service from Southampton or Reading, probably 4 or 5 car, which could easily run to Lime Street.

That leaves an option on an hourly Birmingham to Manchester electric, and an hourly Birmingham to Liverpool electric, both 8/350, probably using a special fleet of 350/3 and 350/4 in pairs with a trolley and an improved First Class. They could even start back from Coventry or International. You’d probably want a Galton Bridge stop for wider connections, Wolverhampton, Penkridge, Stafford. That Liverpool would be the Winsford and Hartford; the Manchester would be Stoke, Congleton, Macclesfield, Stockport.

Works for me, anyway. Makes more sense. But, the usual suspects will appear saying it can’t be done, but everything can be done if you accept timetables have to change.

Timetables can and do change, however people won't do it if the re-write causes a such a magnitude of change for a small difference in trains. The structure of the east side of Birmingham is unlikely to change so you are still constrained on meeting those paths.

 

[Class172]

- The ‘slower’ service from Birmingham to Nottingham will soon be with WMT anyway, so that takes one Nottingham path out. Same applies to Leicester, which will also be WMT on an hourly slow service.

Without wishing to derail the thread, is there a source for this? It would require a full rewrite of XC’s turbostar diagrams as currently Notts and Leics locals interwork with Cardiff and Stansted services.

 

[A0wen]

Works for me, anyway. Makes more sense. But, the usual suspects will appear saying it can’t be done, but everything can be done if you accept timetables have to change.

Anything *can* be done, but it's the ramifications on other parts of the network which tend to mean these things don't happen - such as slots through Birmingham, Leeds and Manchester and the fact it would screw those up.

You've also not addressed the issue of demand - if as you say Southampton Airport has "effectively collapsed" how does that demonstrate demand to travel from Southampton to the NE / Scotland which could be easily / better served by travelling via London. Whereas serving Manchester links Southampton, Basingstoke, Reading and Oxford to Manchester which I suspect there is rather more demand for.

 

[birchesgreen]

Without wishing to derail the thread, is there a source for this? It would require a full rewrite of XC’s turbostar diagrams as currently Notts and Leics locals interwork with Cardiff and Stansted services.

Is is something to do with the new stations. If so then "soon" is a bit of a stretch.

 

[TheBigD]

For me, it’s perhaps slightly easier.
- The Edinburgh service, assuming it will soon be the only XC north of York (see all relevant documents), will need to be 8 coaches. The only other logical 8 coach route south of Birmingham is Bournemouth, therefore that makes it an hourly Bournemouth to Edinburgh. As Southampton Airport has effectively collapsed anyway, it makes sense for them to get the connection to the North East and Scotland.
- The ‘slower’ service from Birmingham to Nottingham will soon be with WMT anyway, so that takes one Nottingham path out. Same applies to Leicester, which will also be WMT on an hourly slow service.
- Bristol starter XC should be a 4 car, and go to Nottingham. Stop also at Ashchurch, or Worcestershire Parkway, as required. Bristol is the regional hub, so it makes sense for Worcestershire Parkway to get that service. At the other end, to Nottingham.
- Cardiff starter XC should be a 5 car, to York.
- Plymouth starter could be a blended 5 and 8 car service to suit capacity at certain times. To Manchester using the Bordesley run.
- That leaves the additional service from Southampton or Reading, probably 4 or 5 car, which could easily run to Lime Street.

That leaves an option on an hourly Birmingham to Manchester electric, and an hourly Birmingham to Liverpool electric, both 8/350, probably using a special fleet of 350/3 and 350/4 in pairs with a trolley and an improved First Class. They could even start back from Coventry or International. You’d probably want a Galton Bridge stop for wider connections, Wolverhampton, Penkridge, Stafford. That Liverpool would be the Winsford and Hartford; the Manchester would be Stoke, Congleton, Macclesfield, Stockport.

Works for me, anyway. Makes more sense. But, the usual suspects will appear saying it can’t be done, but everything can be done if you accept timetables have to change.

What relevant document for the claim that it will be the only XC service north of York? Even the now deferred ECML May 2022 had both XC services north of York. It was the second TPE to Newcastle that was lost.

With regard to Birmingham-Nottingham soon being with WMT, again what's the source for this? There have been proposals for both this and Leicester stoppers to be diverted into Moor Street once the Bordersley Chords are built, but the last EMR franchise consultation looked at both services and they were left with XC.

 

[daodao]

XC are clearly short of carriages. If the Manchester-Birmingham route was removed from XC and passed to a regional operator such as WMR or Northern Rail, they could use some of the older emus currently being withdrawn by other operators. The Voyagers released could be used to strengthen the remaining XC services. Liverpool was removed from the XC network many years ago for operational reasons; there is no reason why the same could not apply to Manchester.

 

[Esker-pades]

What are the chances of the XC network being restored in the next 12-24 months? (And the 3rd London-Manchester service?) If it takes that long is it not better to allocate the surplus capacity to any other service type that requires the uplift now?

Some are going back in May '22. XC haven't made a decision about the Newcastle-Reading service. Given re-writes on the WCML, around Birmingham, around Manchester, and the ECML over the next 18 months, we may well stay in a sort of limbo until then. If a 2nd Birmingham-Manchester does come back (which it should at least for Dec '22), it will be the Bristol XC.

 

[daodao]

As XC are short of carriages, why not remove one of their routes (specifically Manchester-Birmingham) and leave XC with the same stock, but direct them to lengthen their remaining services to relieve overcrowding?

How many sets does that provide them with and who/what replaces them and how long does that take to implement?

In the short-term, the WMR class 350 units not currently needed for the Birmingham-Liverpool service (which is now only hourly) could be used on an hourly Birmingham-Manchester service, almost immediately. In the longer term, West Midlands Trains has announced it will be replacing the Class 350/2 units with Class 730 Aventras; why not retain the class 350/2 units and refurbish them for further use?

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Do we have confirmation that the power supply has capacity for 350s to run Birmingham-Manchester?

 

[Ianno87]

XC are clearly short of carriages. If the Manchester-Birmingham route was removed from XC and passed to a regional operator such as WMR or Northern Rail, they could use some of the older emus currently being withdrawn by other operators. The Voyagers released could be used to strengthen the remaining XC services. Liverpool was removed from the XC network many years ago for operational reasons; there is no reason why the same could not apply to Manchester.

Does beg the question that, if we're serious about de-carbonisation, then splitting off the Manchester XC service to be an EMU would, in principle, be the right thing to do as new bi-mode rolling stock is unlikely to be forthcoming.

The trouble comes in how all these terminating services are then dealt with at New Street.

Do we have confirmation that the power supply has capacity for 350s to run Birmingham-Manchester?

There's that too. Plus crew training etc.

 

[daodao]

The 350/2 units are in 3+2 seating.

Anyhow, i’ll respond proper to this to the Brum-Manc stand alone service thread.

All the class 350 trains that I have used to travel from Hartford to Birmingham or Acton Bridge to Liverpool have had 3+2 seating, which seemed adequate to me and provides more passenger capacity.

Do we have confirmation that the power supply has capacity for 350s to run Birmingham-Manchester?

I suggested that Birmingham-Liverpool service remains hourly, so there shouldn't be a power supply issue from Birmingham to Norton Bridge.

The London-Stoke-Manchester service could make do with 1 tph (so 2 tph London-Manchester) if most of the carriages were converted to 2nd class (there seems to be only one 1st class coach now) so there should be an adequate power supply from Stone northwards.

 

[Glenn1969]

In the long term, I’d like to see a Manchester-Birmingham extension of a LNW service, as I see this type of service being the WCML model between the two cities. Midlands Rail Connect has already given a view on services from Bristol & Reading to Birmingham, and none of them involve heading onwards to Manchester. We will soon find out how much of Midlands Rail Connect is included in the IRP.

• 2 x HS2 Curzon Street, Crewe, Man Airport, Piccadilly HS2
• 1 x LNW Euston, New Street, Stoke, Piccadilly (with various stops)

I would like to see Birmingham get a 2tph Manchester service and a separate 2tph service to West Yorkshire. I don't think it will happen though

 

[Ianno87]

.

The London-Stoke-Manchester service could make do with 1 tph (so 2 tph London-Manchester) if most of the carriages were converted to 2nd class (there seems to be only one 1st class coach now) so there should be an adequate power supply from Stone northwards.

Frequency is massively important on London-Manchester to drive demand and not have people go back to air or road travel.

 

[daodao]

Frequency is massively important on London-Manchester to drive demand and not have people go back to air or road travel.

The greenest approach is not to drive demand for longer distance travel, but encourage use of the Internet for many business meetings.

 

[Purple Orange]

What's wrong with the class 350/2 units?



Are there any spare? Would that not be an expensive option, and over-provision. Class 350/2 trains should be acceptable.

Back in the 2000s, there was a regular service from New Street to Piccadilly on a Pendolino. That may have been before the amalgamation of London-Brum-Scotland, but at that time there was obviously enough units to run London-Brum-Manc. I’m not wholly sure if that is still the case.

In my opinion, I would get rid of XC from the Brum-Manc route and split it. If possible running the following patterns:

• Avanti West Coast London-Brum-Manc (with services calling at Wolverhampton, Stafford, Stoke, Macclesfield, Stockport)
• Extend the LNW Northampton-Birmingham to Manchester via Stoke (with services calling at stations such as Smethwick Galton Bridge, Wolverhampton, Stafford, Stone, Stoke, Congleton, Macclesfield, Cheadle Hulme, Stockport)

This provides far better capacity on what is really an ICWC corridor, with the LNW service enabling better use of commuter capacity.

One thing for certain is that we can’t equate services to Liverpool and Manchester, as they are two very different markets in terms of scale & demand.

I would like to see Birmingham get a 2tph Manchester service and a separate 2tph service to West Yorkshire. I don't think it will happen though

Post HS2, I’m not sure a 2 tph service on the WCML with current stopping patterns is the right thing to do. Certainly any service pattern should facilitate more stops.

 

[Ianno87]

The greenest approach is not to drive demand for longer distance travel, but encourage use of the Internet for many business meetings.

Or make best use of rail capacity so that people don't just drive instead.

 

[Purple Orange]

This argument of encouraging use of the internet for business meetings is completely redundant. This already happens daily. Yet there is still a need to meet face-to-face on occasions for which rail must be meeting the demand here. Today the WCML barely competes with the car between Manchester & Birmingham and until HS2 arrives, that won’t change.

 

[The Planner]

I personally think a lot of it will be moot anyway as come next week the treasury and the IRP will be taking such a knife to costs that TOCs wouldn't be able to afford to bring a lot of these services back and NR will be able to put up the bare minimum of wires. We are going to be saddled with bi-modes for a long time to come.