Effect of planned new WCML timetable on Milton Keynes Central

[A0]

Watford Jn has long used pick up/set down restrictions to successfully manage this, right back to BR days.

Pick up / set down restrictions are pretty unenforceable - which is probably why they've fallen out of use in many places.

The problem with Watford is it isn't long enough for a ticket check on an 11 car train, particularly if it's busy.

Far better to have some services omit Watford - as with the other examples I gave - than create a problem "just because".

 

[Bletchleyite]

Pick up / set down restrictions are pretty unenforceable - which is probably why they've fallen out of use in many places.

The problem with Watford is it isn't long enough for a ticket check on an 11 car train, particularly if it's busy.

It doesn't matter if one or two sneak on, it's about the masses. And the masses respect them now and always have done.

I am not proposing something new - this is already the case. I love the way people in this Forum love to rubbish things that are in place and working now. That'll never work...um, it's working now.

Far better to have some services omit Watford - as with the other examples I gave - than create a problem "just because".

There isn't a problem now.

 

[A0]

It doesn't matter if one or two sneak on, it's about the masses. And the masses respect them now and always have done.

I am not proposing something new - this is already the case. I love the way people in this Forum love to rubbish things that are in place and working now. That'll never work...um, it's working now.



There isn't a problem now.

Pick up / set down restrictions have been removed from many places - Stevenage being one such example:

Stops to set down/pick up only

What are the main reasons why trains have restrictions on setting down or picking up at a particular location? What sort of punishment could you expect for getting on/off a train in violation of the above? Would it mean you've travelled without a valid ticket?

www.railforums.co.uk

So many passengers won't be familiar with it - as I said, there are simpler ways to do it and Watford doesn't need every train (post HS2) stopping there, nor does Milton Keynes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Pick up / set down restrictions have been removed from many places - Stevenage being one such example:

Stops to set down/pick up only

What are the main reasons why trains have restrictions on setting down or picking up at a particular location? What sort of punishment could you expect for getting on/off a train in violation of the above? Would it mean you've travelled without a valid ticket?

www.railforums.co.uk

The restrictions have been in place at WFJ for well over 30 years and work fine.

So many passengers won't be familiar with it - as I said, there are simpler ways to do it and Watford doesn't need every train (post HS2) stopping there, nor does Milton Keynes.

Yes, they do. Connectivity wins - HS2 is about speed.

 

[Tester]

It doesn't matter if one or two sneak on, it's about the masses. And the masses respect them now and always have done.

I am not proposing something new - this is already the case. I love the way people in this Forum love to rubbish things that are in place and working now. That'll never work...um, it's working now.



There isn't a problem now.

The restrictions have been in place at WFJ for well over 30 years and work fine.



Yes, they do. Connectivity wins - HS2 is about speed.

'From the ground' I can absolutely confirm that the pick up/set down restrictions at Watford Junction work effectively.

Currently it is easy to understand why few Avanti trains can call - nothing to do with demand given the catchment area of people for which going into London to get back out again is a turn off. Come HS2 we would like a decent service back thank you very much.

If only we still had platform 5!

 

[Philip]

no, they wouldn’t.



and passengers between Birmingham NS / Birmingham Intl / Coventry rather want them to stop. And there’s rather a lot of them. Also, having a non stop train from New St to the other side of Coventyr needs som enough holes punched in the timetable of everything else.

Birmingham to B'ham Intl/Coventry is a local route and so it should primarily be the responsibility of WMT to ensure an adequate level of capacity between the stations. Avanti do need to serve both B'ham Intl and Coventry but for the purpose of a service to London; and two trains per hour fits this purpose (not to mention the WMT London service). The third service should not be stopping at either station; it is for WMT to pick this one up either with an additional service of their own, or if there are no paths then by strengthening of existing services.

 

[jfollows]

'From the ground' I can absolutely confirm that the pick up/set down restrictions at Watford Junction work effectively.

Currently it is easy to understand why few Avanti trains can call - nothing to do with demand given the catchment area of people for which going into London to get back out again is a turn off. Come HS2 we would like a decent service back thank you very much.

If only we still had platform 5!

As a destination too, I think we're in violent agreement.
The first Pendolino sets were introduced on the Manchester-Stockport-Wilmslow-Watford-Euston service which left Manchester around 06:45. I used it anyway, but I used it for Watford as a destination twice and as a place to change for Kensington Olympia for a week also. As we've already said, only a small passenger flow, but I won't be alone, and currently Watford as a destination is a pain for me, likewise Olympia, because they both require two changes from Wilmslow.
On the pick up only at Clapham, I'm in agreement with Bletchleyite, simply don't announce it as a call and don't bother enforcing it. As Stockport used to be for all long distance departures from Manchester, nobody cared if you got off at Stockport, it's only because of ORCATS that this changed I'm sure, and hopefully now we can go back to the original way of doing things.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As a destination too, I think we're in violent agreement.
The first Pendolino sets were introduced on the Manchester-Stockport-Wilmslow-Watford-Euston service which left Manchester around 06:45. I used it anyway, but I used it for Watford as a destination twice and as a place to change for Kensington Olympia for a week also. As we've already said, only a small passenger flow, but I won't be alone, and currently Watford as a destination is a pain for me, likewise Olympia, because they both require two changes from Wilmslow.
On the pick up only at Clapham, I'm in agreement with Bletchleyite, simply don't announce it as a call and don't bother enforcing it. As Stockport used to be for all long distance departures from Manchester, nobody cared if you got off at Stockport, it's only because of ORCATS that this changed I'm sure, and hopefully now we can go back to the original way of doing things.

Stockport and Watford were to be fair for different reasons - for Watford it was about not crowding out with commuters (so it has always been enforced - guards are watching and give people an earful for doing it!) but for Stockport it was primarily so trains could depart early towards Manchester, so nobody cared if you boarded one.

TPE at Bolton is similarly "avoiding overcrowding on a shorter*, busy EMU when you've got a 6 car commuter EMU right behind it", though I forget if it's still the case.

* I know they're 5-car, but because of the end vehicles only being 2/3 vehicles and them less well-designed for standees 6.331 has a far, far higher capacity.

 

[Bald Rick]

Birmingham to B'ham Intl/Coventry is a local route and so it should primarily be the responsibility of WMT to ensure an adequate level of capacity between the stations. Avanti do need to serve both B'ham Intl and Coventry but for the purpose of a service to London; and two trains per hour fits this purpose (not to mention the WMT London service). The third service should not be stopping at either station; it is for WMT to pick this one up either with an additional service of their own, or if there are no paths then by strengthening of existing services.

In your opinion of course. And it’s wrong.

 

[jfollows]

Stockport and Watford were to be fair for different reasons - for Watford it was about not crowding out with commuters (so it has always been enforced - guards are watching and give people an earful for doing it!) but for Stockport it was primarily so trains could depart early towards Manchester, so nobody cared if you boarded one.

I totally agree, but I mentioned earlier a case when Stockport was both set down and pick up for Manchester Piccadilly but trains left early anyway, and I suspect in the unlikely event of trains running early today they'll continue to leave Stockport early also, even though they shouldn't.

 

[The Planner]

In your opinion of course. And it’s wrong.

+1

 

[Bletchleyite]

I totally agree, but I mentioned earlier a case when Stockport was both set down and pick up for Manchester Piccadilly but trains left early anyway, and I suspect in the unlikely event of trains running early today they'll continue to leave Stockport early also, even though they shouldn't.

Quite possibly, but the structure of the timetable now makes intermediate early running very unlikely - it's really tight with recovery time all at the termini.

You only seem to get significant early running during engineering works and in the evenings where timetables are padded to allow for slow-line-only operation south of Hanslope Jn. And I don't know about Stockport, but these trains do wait for time at MKC.

 

[jfollows]

Quite possibly, but the structure of the timetable now makes intermediate early running very unlikely - it's really tight with recovery time all at the termini.

You only seem to get significant early running during engineering works and in the evenings where timetables are padded to allow for slow-line-only operation south of Hanslope Jn. And I don't know about Stockport, but these trains do wait for time at MKC.

I agree, as I usually do with you!
1R22 this morning certainly waited time at Milton Keynes Central, it has a silly timetable for this week only and the 110mph EMU it was booked to follow from Rugby today ran late so 1R22 preceded it.
In the dim and distant past I would catch trains "set down only" at Wilmslow into Manchester which had run non-stop from London Euston, so had the scope for running early, without the running time information we now have I had to get to the station early in case, and inevitably found that it was running late! But nowadays it's a stretch for London-Manchester trains to be on time at Wilmslow, they're normally a couple of minutes down.
1R22 today: (over 6 minutes at Milton Keynes Central)

 

[Philip]

In your opinion of course. And it’s wrong.

There's a bit of inconsistency at times; on the one hand it is argued that TPE shouldn't be stopping intercity services at Salford, Bolton and Chorley because it causes overcrowding and that it should be left to the local operator to serve these routes; a similar situation applies with Avanti serving Coventry and B'ham Intl but apparently all Avanti trains should serve these stations.

Don't forget that Cross Country have also doubled their own capacity between New Street and Coventry by running 8-10 car Voyagers and also that Avanti have already been running at a half hourly frequency on the Birmingham route for the best part of 2 years.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There's a bit of inconsistency at times; on the one hand it is argued that TPE shouldn't be stopping intercity services at Salford, Bolton and Chorley because it causes overcrowding and that it should be left to the local operator to serve these routes; a similar situation applies with Avanti serving Coventry and B'ham Intl but apparently all Avanti trains should serve these stations.

To provide them with a service to London (and in the case of the through Scottish service, Scotland and the North West). They are both major railheads.

Also, stopping them here doesn't cause overcrowding. There is no reason to put these restrictions in place where overcrowding isn't caused. TPE is different, because a 5-car 397 is a lot smaller than an 11-car 390.

 

[Philip]

To provide them with a service to London (and in the case of the through Scottish service, Scotland and the North West). They are both major railheads.

Also, stopping them here doesn't cause overcrowding. There is no reason to put these restrictions in place where overcrowding isn't caused. TPE is different, because a 5-car 397 is a lot smaller than an 11-car 390.

I still feel that there should be a limited or non-stop Birmingham to London service in place among the 3 Avanti services for people regularly making New Street-London journeys. The Scotland service could call at Coventry and Intl if retaining direct links to the NW/Scotland is important, whilst the London-Birmingham shuttle which currently doesn't even run can be reintroduced in December as the 'express' service I'm on about.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I still feel that there should be a limited or non-stop Birmingham to London service in place among the 3 Avanti services for people regularly making New Street-London journeys. The Scotland service could call at Coventry and Intl if retaining direct links to the NW/Scotland is important, whilst the London-Birmingham shuttle which currently doesn't even run can be reintroduced in December as the 'express' service I'm on about.

For the 8 minutes or so the two stops cost, I genuinely don't think complicating the timetable is appropriate.

 

[The Planner]

I still feel that there should be a limited or non-stop Birmingham to London service in place among the 3 Avanti services for people regularly making New Street-London journeys. The Scotland service could call at Coventry and Intl if retaining direct links to the NW/Scotland is important, whilst the London-Birmingham shuttle which currently doesn't even run can be reintroduced in December as the 'express' service I'm on about.

But where is the demand for it? There was only ever one no stop service prior to COVID in the morning peak to capture the business market and a Birmingham International starter which followed it to pick up the stops and that is dead. Note there was not one in the opposite direction in the evening. The Dec 22 re-write makes 2tph fast from Coventry to Euston with 1tph which does all the major stations. The fact that International and Coventry are in all three services tells you something, unless you know something the industry doesn't.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But where is the demand for it? There was only ever one no stop service prior to COVID in the morning peak to capture the business market and a Birmingham International starter which followed it to pick up the stops and that is dead. Note there was not one in the opposite direction in the evening. The Dec 22 re-write makes 2tph fast from Coventry to Euston with 1tph which does all the major stations. The fact that International and Coventry are in all three services tells you something, unless you know something the industry doesn't.

What I think @Philip is missing is the Parkway role of both International and Cov. They are similar to Stockport in this sense (and that receives all three Manchesters*), with very large multi storey car parks to suit. Most journeys are not city centre to city centre, they are suburb to city centre.

* The oft-quoted argument that the railway is mandated by some old law to stop everything there seems to be false, as there have been trains non-stop through it in the past - I think it was XC.

 

[Bald Rick]

There's a bit of inconsistency at times

not from me there isn’t.

There is very significant revenue between London and Birmingham International, and between all three of New Street, International and Coventry. Journey time and frequency are important.

 

[Bletchleyite]

not from me there isn’t.

There is very significant revenue between London and Birmingham International, and between all three of New Street, International and Coventry. Journey time and frequency are important.

Like Stockport, it's also different from the TPE situation (or Watford Jn) because significant numbers of people travel Euston<->Cov and Euston<->BHI, and as such there is always plenty of capacity for people to make the short journey into New St.

 

[The Planner]

Like Stockport, it's also different from the TPE situation (or Watford Jn) because significant numbers of people travel Euston<->Cov and Euston<->BHI, and as such there is always plenty of capacity for people to make the short journey into New St.

Its like I noted earlier, International doesn't have a 2000 space car park for nothing. Pre COVID the amount of revenue that was bringing in at £12 a day (ignoring season tickets) over a year would have been massive.

 

[Starmill]

Like Stockport, it's also different from the TPE situation (or Watford Jn) because significant numbers of people travel Euston<->Cov and Euston<->BHI, and as such there is always plenty of capacity for people to make the short journey into New St.

You say this frequently, and while it's definitely more true in the case of Coventry and Birmingham International to Birmingham than it is for Stockport to Manchester or Wakefield to Leeds, it is absolutely not universally the case.

The old 0620 from London carried almost nobody from its origin but significant numbers from Rugby, Coventry, and Birmingham International. The 0643 from London carried more people from Coventry and Birmingham International than London, despite being bound for Edinburgh. The old 0616 from London had very few people using it from London, but sometimes left people behind at Macclesfield. It also had people with standard tickets standing in the doorways of First. The other operators on these routes have never been able to absorb the numbers travelling, nearly all of whom were office commuters.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You say this frequently, and while it's definitely more true in the case of Coventry and Birmingham International to Birmingham than it is for Stockport to Manchester or Wakefield to Leeds, it is absolutely not universally the case.

The old 0620 from London carried almost nobody from its origin but significant numbers from Rugby, Coventry, and Birmingham International. The 0643 from London carried more people from Coventry and Birmingham International than London, despite being bound for Edinburgh. The old 0616 from London had very few people using it from London, but sometimes left people behind at Macclesfield. It also had people with standard tickets standing in the doorways of First. The other operators on these routes have never been able to absorb the numbers travelling, nearly all of whom were office commuters.

I'd agree there are cases where it's not true, and in some of those cases it's because the local service is utterly inadequate, e.g. whatever old 2-car DMU Northern can be bothered to chuck out that morning.

 

[cle]

The WCML will become a semi-fast railway serving the smaller cities and larger towns on the route, and feeding the three main cities. But not between those three, ideally.

As such, stopping everything at Watford and MKC might spread the passengers more evenly across the trains. Especially if there is a standardized 350x type fleet which is a little nicer but still 'elevated commuter' or something grandiose. And room in the timetable to do it.

Plus London-Birmingham passengers should be encouraged/coerced by stopping patterns to use HS2. Manchester too. It might end up with tons of capacity if extensions don't go ahead, e.g. to EMP - so after Coventry/Stoke, we can def add calls if platform lengths support them. That stretch is destined to be a 2-track skip stop, like New St - Wolvo, local journeys can be for buses.

 

[A0]

There's a bit of inconsistency at times; on the one hand it is argued that TPE shouldn't be stopping intercity services at Salford, Bolton and Chorley because it causes overcrowding and that it should be left to the local operator to serve these routes; a similar situation applies with Avanti serving Coventry and B'ham Intl but apparently all Avanti trains should serve these stations.

Don't forget that Cross Country have also doubled their own capacity between New Street and Coventry by running 8-10 car Voyagers and also that Avanti have already been running at a half hourly frequency on the Birmingham route for the best part of 2 years.

I'm not sure Salford, Bolton or Chorley are really comparable with Birmingham International (linked to Birmingham Airport and the NEC) or Coventry (a major city in its own right).

Had you compared them with the Watford Junction where post HS2 the suggestion is everything should stop there, I think you'd have been on stronger ground. Watford is to London what Bolton is to Manchester.

 

[cle]

Except that Watford had 8.4m users before the pandy, the most of all of these. Coventry was next at 8.2m and then both MKC and B'ham Int around 7m. All significant though.

Bolton has 3m and a much larger population (similar to Coventry's) - economically a very different story. Watford has tons of HQs and inbound. Rail use and population have little in common.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Except that Watford had 8.4m users before the pandy, the most of all of these. Coventry was next at 8.2m and then both MKC and B'ham Int around 7m. All significant though.

Bolton has 3m and a much larger population (similar to Coventry's) - economically a very different story. Watford has tons of HQs and inbound. Rail use and population have little in common.

I was surprised WFJ had more usage than MKC, though what is also relevant is where to - it could be mostly London commuting.

 

[A0]

Except that Watford had 8.4m users before the pandy, the most of all of these. Coventry was next at 8.2m and then both MKC and B'ham Int around 7m. All significant though.

Bolton has 3m and a much larger population (similar to Coventry's) - economically a very different story. Watford has tons of HQs and inbound. Rail use and population have little in common.

BIB virtually all of which are heading into London with 10tph split over LO, LNW and Southern.

Birmingham International's reach - in terms of distance people travel to it - is much greater than Watford due to the NEC and the Airport.

 

[Starmill]

There's a bit of inconsistency at times; on the one hand it is argued that TPE shouldn't be stopping intercity services at Salford, Bolton and Chorley because it causes overcrowding and that it should be left to the local operator to serve these routes; a similar situation applies with Avanti serving Coventry and B'ham Intl but apparently all Avanti trains should serve these stations.

Don't forget that Cross Country have also doubled their own capacity between New Street and Coventry by running 8-10 car Voyagers and also that Avanti have already been running at a half hourly frequency on the Birmingham route for the best part of 2 years.

Specifically regarding Chorley and Salford Crescent, the main reason for not stopping there is that there's not enough time to rather than something related to capacity. There is really no reason to worry about people travelling from Bolton to Manchester anyway on those services because they don't call at peak times, off peak there's absolutely no reason not to let people on, regardless of if all seats are already taken, as people will often stand anyway for that journey, and indeed sometimes people do get on. It's a little bit different in the other direction, but Bolton has almost no northbound stops in the afternoon anyway, just 1230, 1330 and 2030 departures from Manchester Oxford Road. So the restriction could easily be dropped.