Grand Central apply for Newcastle - Brighton direct

[Peter Mugridge]

Correct. Vueling probably? (They only serve Gatwick IIRC)

Vueling serves Heathrow as well these days...

...which makes things more blurred about specific destinations from specific airports and does put more onus on the airport with better onward travel opportunities to take advantage of them.

The point raised elsewhere in the thread in the last few hours that more people use Thameslink than Gatwick Express these days is very relevant; travel patterns have changed but the DfT doesn't seem to fully understand that.

 

[A S Leib]

I thought that in one of the various ECML Dec 2025 threads it was stated that the existing XC TOC could not reinstate the entire hourly Reading to Newcastle service because of pathing conflicts between York and Newcastle

It might be that waits at York would be unjustifiably long rather than there being absolutely no capacity, but it feels a poor situation for Newcastle to have lost hourly services to Reading and Manchester Airport, the extra York service towards London from December notwithstanding.

 

[Zomboid]

The miniscule number of passengers for whom Gatwick is the only airport of choice, the 4+ hour journey time to get there, and the small number of trains per day (you are either going to be too late or too early for your flight) make me think this Gatwick thing can only be a gimmick.

It's not going to be helpful for people from north of Birmingham, but a direct train from Oxford and Banbury to Gatwick might have a few takers

 

[Bertie the bus]

It might be that waits at York would be unjustifiably long rather than there being absolutely no capacity, but it feels a poor situation for Newcastle to have lost hourly services to Reading and Manchester Airport, the extra York service towards London from December notwithstanding.

It is always strange when people refer to towns and cities as though they are people. No town or city deserves or has a right to anything. If there are potentially high enough flows between two points then a direct service is probably justified but I seriously doubt there is much of a flow between Newcastle and Reading. Why would there be? Just to pre-empt some replies, population size doesn’t equate to potential number of passengers between two places hundreds of miles apart.

 

[NCT]

And as places like the Netherlands and Switzerland an attest, a simple high-frequency network with easily understood and reliable interchanges is more effective at attracting passengers than a complex network of direct trains getting delayed by all the conflicts they cause.

 

[JonathanH]

It's not going to be helpful for people from north of Birmingham, but a direct train from Oxford and Banbury to Gatwick might have a few takers

Some years ago, Thames Trains connected Oxford and Gatwick a number of times a day, but those were days when there was one train an hour on CrossCountry between Reading and Oxford and one train an hour from Paddington to Oxford. When there are already six trains an hour most hours between Reading and Oxford including the stopping service and a desire to link Bristol and Oxford, what gives?

 

[A S Leib]

It is always strange when people refer to towns and cities as though they are people. No town or city deserves or has a right to anything. If there are potentially high enough flows between two points then a direct service is probably justified but I seriously doubt there is much of a flow between Newcastle and Reading. Why would there be? Just to pre-empt some replies, population size doesn’t equate to potential number of passengers between two places hundreds of miles apart.

It's not so much Reading itself that I'm aggrieved about; for Newcastle's – for pendants' sake, Newcastle's inhabitants' – sake it's mostly that it's meant the loss of the second Sheffield service, particularly one which avoids Leeds. (Banbury and Leamington Spa would presumably like their second / third Oxford and Reading service back.)

 

[NCT]

The entire Leeds/Sheffield - York - Newcastle corridor is so complex with different trains running in different hours. It's confusing for passengers and recipe for poor performance. All segments operate high frequencies of trains yet passengers cannot benefit from that frequency - all the skip-stopping, alternate routings, trains that don't connect. Would be much better to have a simpler timetable of all half-hourly services. Yes, some passengers might have to change more, but you know that if there is one routing identified for your journey then you've got the same journey opportunity every half an hour for the whole day.

 

[driverd]

It is always strange when people refer to towns and cities as though they are people. No town or city deserves or has a right to anything. If there are potentially high enough flows between two points then a direct service is probably justified but I seriously doubt there is much of a flow between Newcastle and Reading. Why would there be? Just to pre-empt some replies, population size doesn’t equate to potential number of passengers between two places hundreds of miles apart.

I'm not sure that anyone is suggesting Newcastle desperately requires a Reading service, but the absence of the Reading train reduces journey opportunities to Doncaster, Sheffield, the Midlands etc. What frustrates people is when a service has long existed, and then is removed without much in the way of a sensible replacement.

And as places like the Netherlands and Switzerland an attest, a simple high-frequency network with easily understood and reliable interchanges is more effective at attracting passengers than a complex network of direct trains getting delayed by all the conflicts they cause.

But, we're not the Netherlands or Switzerland. The demographic and population spread of these countries is different to ours and the journey needs are different, along with the finding models of each country.

I'm not too sure how you would improve services on the York-Newcaslte corridor whilst meeting the conflicting needs of the industry - frequency of course is important, but surely the best compromise is, in essence, the old version of XC - regular pattern on a core route with extensions to fulfil the needs of select customers (possibly with a bit of a journey times penatly)?

 

[Bertie the bus]

I'm not sure that anyone is suggesting Newcastle desperately requires a Reading service, but the absence of the Reading train reduces journey opportunities to Doncaster, Sheffield, the Midlands etc. What frustrates people is when a service has long existed, and then is removed without much in the way of a sensible replacement.

It's not so much Reading itself that I'm aggrieved about; for Newcastle's – for pendants' sake, Newcastle's inhabitants' – sake it's mostly that it's meant the loss of the second Sheffield service, particularly one which avoids Leeds. (Banbury and Leamington Spa would presumably like their second / third Oxford and Reading service back.)

Newcastle - Sheffield has fewer than 100 passengers per day. How does that justify a 1/2 hourly service?

 

[eldomtom2]

It's not going to be helpful for people from north of Birmingham, but a direct train from Oxford and Banbury to Gatwick might have a few takers

A quick look at Google Maps suggests the proposed service would be competitive with the car and existing rail options in terms of journey time between Oxford and Gatwick.

 

[NCT]

But, we're not the Netherlands or Switzerland. The demographic and population spread of these countries is different to ours and the journey needs are different, along with the finding models of each country.

I'm not too sure how you would improve services on the York-Newcaslte corridor whilst meeting the conflicting needs of the industry - frequency of course is important, but surely the best compromise is, in essence, the old version of XC - regular pattern on a core route with extensions to fulfil the needs of select customers (possibly with a bit of a journey times penatly)?

Our timetable is inefficient. We run the physical frequency without the passenger being able to benefit from it. We run too many short trains that get in each others' ways. A tight funding model favours running a smaller number of longer trains with more robust performance.

The problem is most of the country is now 'core' - from the South Coast all the way to the Scottish Central belt infrastructure utilisation is high and the network cannot cope with services that run outside of an all-day consistent structure (or a loose 'takt' if you will).

The primarily function of a railway should be an economic one. It should serve people who use the railway for commute and work purposes to grow the economy and the tax base. Such people tend to be high information, favour frequency and reliability over a one-seat-ride. Parts of the country are too geared towards leisure travellers on subsidised fares whose journeys have limited tax base growing values.

 

[daodao]

Must say from a North East perspective, I'd much rather see something like

North East - Doncaster - Sheffield - Derby - Leicester - Bedford - Bletchley - Bicester Village - Oxford - Down to Brighton

Be quite a useful service as getting from the North East to the East Midlands is quite difficult currently, due to the problems with Crosscountry. Would be useful for Luton airport aswell as it's just a quick hop on Thameslink to Bedford for connections and makes use of the new East-West line. Not to mention all the links in between like Bicester Village and what not. Ideally Nottingham would be better than Derby but that would involve a turn back.

This proposed service imo is completely useless and is wasting more limited paths on the ECML.

Why would one route a service from Bedford to Brighton via Oxford and Reading, when there is an existing half-hourly direct service between these 2 towns taking just under 2.5 hours?

Passengers from stations on the Midland and East Coast main lines between Newcastle-upon-Tyne and Derby, including all points on the proposed routeing, can in any case make a 1 stop change at King's Cross/St. Pancras for this frequent direct service to Gatwick Airport and Brighton, without having to cross London by tube/taxi, so I don't understand the logic behind the proposed service whether it runs via Bedford or Birmingham.

 

[swt_passenger]

Why would one route a service from Bedford to Brighton via Oxford and Reading, when there is an existing half-hourly direct service between these 2 towns taking just under 2.5 hours?

It can only be because EWR is about to open, and some forum members are hung up on the possibility of through running ‘cross country type‘ services, even though the DfT has said the infrastructure is not designed for it and the hoped for services are not happening…

 

[Zomboid]

Why would one route a service from Bedford to Brighton via Oxford and Reading, when there is an existing half-hourly direct service between these 2 towns taking just under 2.5 hours?

Because it's not about the end to end journey. It's Bedford to Reading, Bicester to Guildford, Oxford to Brighton, that kind of thing.

 

[cle]

Because it's not about the end to end journey. It's Bedford to Reading, Bicester to Guildford, Oxford to Brighton, that kind of thing.

Exactly - all about offering new / multiple pairs, and the ability to sell ‘a seat’ * multiple times.

* seats rarely guaranteed on XC!

Another thing - this discussion is very focused on Gatwick Airport. This service could do a lot more, and Brighton is a fairly big draw from across the country. Also a sizeable regional population who might want access to Reading and Oxford - and the connections they offer.

Redhill and Haywards Heath offer lots of connections, and railhead for larger catchments - but also pathing (Redhill reversal so may as well call) - HH offers overtake.

 

[Snex]

Because it's not about the end to end journey. It's Bedford to Reading, Bicester to Guildford, Oxford to Brighton, that kind of thing.

This basically instead of repeating the same to the post you've quoted.

It was about making shorter useful journeys the North links coming from links to Leicester, Bedford (for Luton Airport), Bicester, Oxford / Reading from the East Midlands etc which are rather difficult to do currently without multiple changes or doubling back via London / Birmingham.

No-one is going to Gatwick from the North of England, full stop imo

 

[NCT]

With ultra long-distance services serving predominantly short-distance flows, you get all the accumulated delays and none of the benefit.

This is the problem with German ICEs - it's basically a glorified Cross Country network with many trains relying on a 6-minute reversal at Frankfurt Hbf. The result is hardly anything ever runs to time.

 

[Zomboid]

With ultra long-distance services serving predominantly short-distance flows, you get all the accumulated delays and none of the benefit.

This is the problem with German ICEs - it's basically a glorified Cross Country network with many trains relying on a 6-minute reversal at Frankfurt Hbf. The result is hardly anything ever runs to time.

That is a downside of that approach, but I suppose the question is where do you break it down into shorter runs that can be more self contained?
In the case of Newcastle - Brighton, that would seem to be Birmingham. If it's going via the East Mids it'd be what, Brighton - Nottingham and Nottingham - Newcastle?

 

[FlyingPotato]

This basically instead of repeating the same to the post you've quoted.

It was about making shorter useful journeys the North links coming from links to Leicester, Bedford (for Luton Airport), Bicester, Oxford / Reading from the East Midlands etc which are rather difficult to do currently without multiple changes or doubling back via London / Birmingham.

No-one is going to Gatwick from the North of England, full stop imo

I'm going to have to disagree with your bottom point, I know a good amount of people who travel from the North down to Gatwick and other London Airports because they may be better for certain flights I.E long haul, cheaper overall, or because it's more convenient due to other reasons, I myself am travelling to London Gatwick from the North to fly as it allowed me to travel with family and save money

I think people from the North may use this service for Gatwick flights but it won't be the main market for Northerners

 

[Snex]

That is a downside of that approach, but I suppose the question is where do you break it down into shorter runs that can be more self contained?
In the case of Newcastle - Brighton, that would seem to be Birmingham. If it's going via the East Mids it'd be what, Brighton - Nottingham and Nottingham - Newcastle?

I do agree with the points about the splitting of the services tbh.

Brighton to Birmingham is the obvious choice for this service really. The rest of the route just isn't really needed and it has a good argument for it's existence aswell.

Nottingham - Sheffield - Leeds really needs a better express service though.

How you do it though who knows.

I'm going to have to disagree with your bottom point, I know a good amount of people who travel from the North down to Gatwick and other London Airports because they may be better for certain flights I.E long haul, cheaper overall, or because it's more convenient due to other reasons, I myself am travelling to London Gatwick from the North to fly as it allowed me to travel with family and save money

I think people from the North may use this service for Gatwick flights but it won't be the main market for Northerners

Yeah it's a fair post, must admit I don't know anyone from here using Gatwick but I guess we are the far North, to be fair.

 

[FlyingPotato]

I do agree with the points about the splitting of the services tbh.

Brighton to Birmingham is the obvious choice for this service really. The rest of the route just isn't really needed and it has a good argument for it's existence aswell.

Nottingham - Sheffield - Leeds really needs a better express service though.

How you do it though who knows.



Yeah it's a fair post, must admit I don't know anyone from here using Gatwick but I guess we are the far North, to be fair.

The people I know are on the sort of Manchester to Leeds corridor so it's relatively quick in the grand scheme of things

But ultimately I do admit as well that the amount of people using the Service from the Likes of Newcastle and York for Gatwick will be small on a day by day basis so almost irrelevant to an extent when looking at daily flows

 

[BlueLeanie]

Back in 1980s and 1990s XC via Oxford might have been 2 hourly, but would get 10-12 carriages, nowadays XC is hourly but often only 4 or 5 carriages, and risk of overcrowding or struggling to get on at Oxford as only 4car train is provided is high. XC seems to be pricing to limit demand (even if low profitability), not encouraging travel from Warwickshire to Sussex

Weren't they generally 7 coaches, of which one was a brake coach with fewer seats?

I think people from the North may use this service for Gatwick flights but it won't be the main market for Northerners

It probably won't even appear in the journey planners, unless people specifically exclude a change, as at least half a dozen connecting services will get there before the direct service.

People will use it for a direct link to Reading. It's unlikely Oxford residents will use it as there's a perfectly good coach that runs hourly almost 24 hours day between Oxford and Gatwick.

 

[JonathanH]

Weren't they generally 7 coaches, of which one was a brake coach with fewer seats?

From 1991 to 2002, yes. 26 first, about 350 standard class seats, until some additional luggage racks were fitted.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

As a Londoner this is of no use to me. However if a cross country service was introduced that had stops in the London suburbs, I’d probably use it even if it’s longer, nothing worse than the stuffy Victoria line after a long train trip from somewhere

 

[The Ham]

Whilst each person don't it isn't going to be generating much income, trains which cross towns where currently a change is likely to generate a reasonable number of passengers.

For example being able to do Guildford to Oxford in 60 minutes (or slightly less) rather than 75 to 90 minutes will be quite attractive.

Likewise, being able to do North Downs line to Brighton without a change is likely to be attractive to some.

Obviously 5tpd isn't going to make a significant difference, and north of Reading there's already services which go across the places it will serve.

 

[YorkRailFan]

A quick look at Google Maps suggests the proposed service would be competitive with the car and existing rail options in terms of journey time between Oxford and Gatwick.

Yet both of those have the advantage when it comes to frequency. Price of course is another matter which no one will know until the service starts, if approved of course.

 

[Snow1964]

A quick look at Google Maps suggests the proposed service would be competitive with the car and existing rail options in terms of journey time between Oxford and Gatwick.

Although M25 can be prone to delays during the day.

Unless the driver is just dropping off or picking up (and that can incur charges), time (and cost) taken to park and get to terminal might be factor in competitiveness, but without knowing proposed fares can't compare costs.

 

[cle]

Redhill-Brighton ostensibly being a new pair too

I mentioned it with Reshill and Haywards Heath but there are a lot of other connections to be made at Guildford, Reading and Oxford for many. Folks heading to Bicester, the Cotswolds, anyone heading north of west from the Portsmouth area…

It’s a shame Redhill isn’t more use re heading east, ie towards Maidstone or Ashford/Canterbury/coast, as strategically it could have way more purpose connecting Kent to the rest of the country but avoiding London (or HS1 costs)

 

[Zomboid]

Redhill itself isn't anything a stop at Reigate wouldn't cover, but it would be a useful interchange if someone did somehow justify the flyover to the Tonbridge lines. You'd probably need platforms up there to make it work, which will inflate the already unjustifiable price tag for such a thing.

But if it did exist then Ashford, Canterbury and Ramsgate to Reading, Oxford and Birmingham would be the kind of route that might do a bit of business. Even without the flyover, there are rails in right places to allow trains to pass between the branches, but that's not to say there would be paths for it.