How could unsatisfactory branch shuttles be improved?

[Andyh82]

Blackpool South. Fir the areas it serves its rotten and needs double tracking or loops at least

I don’t think that counts as pretty much every service leaves the branch and goes elsewhere (to Colne)

 

[D6130]

Helsby - Ellesmere Port.

Don't think that's a shuttle. I thought those trains ran through to/from Liverpool or Manchester via Warrington? A couple of years ago the evening Ellesmere Port service was a through train from Leeds via the Calder Valley.

 

[tbtc]

People on here really don't like terminating anything short of where it could end up (e.g. the thread about extending Glasgow - Manchester to Birmingham, but then you can't terminate things at busy old New Street so you might as well extend it through to Bristol, but then why not go the whole hog and make it Penzance... actually, it could start further north of Glasgow, maybe Inverness... no, I know, Thurso, let's start it at Thurso...) - they hate the idea of buffer stops - even if it means knocking down half of central Bradford!

Yet, when it comes to bus services, a lot of people on here love the idea of terminating bus routes at some suburban roundabout so that people are forced to change to a tram (it's apparently fine for buses to terminate in the middle of nowhere and people be forced to change, but bad if rail passengers have to change anywhere...

I share some of the frustrations with branches - they can be inefficient uses of resources, they can require non-standard stock (e.g. a diesel branch in an electrified region, the 139s for Stourbridge, the hassle in getting trains between a branch with a PVR of one and a distant depot) and therefore something to try to avoid/simplify - but that said, I can see why it might be better to have a short unit doing the shuttle than either running twelve coach trains from the main line to the branch or running short trains from the branch onto the main line... tricky

The three problems with a shuttle (as I see it) are:

1. Does it terminate at a useful destination in its own right, or at somewhere that's only really a junction?
2. Could/ Should/ Would the frequency be any better if it was a through service/ would it be better to have a reduced frequency on the branch if they were through trains?
3. Is there scope for through trains on the main line?

In the case of Cornwall, I'd suggest that Par is a pretty rubbish place to terminate Newquay services (it's not much of a destination in its own right, compared to the Falmouth branch which terminates in the regional centre of Truro) and that there's nothing stopping an increased frequency on the Newquay branch with just one unit (whereas the Falmouth branch is pretty much at capacity) and there's nothing stopping through trains from Newquay to Plymouth on a more regular basis

For the Thames Valley branches, they look fine as they are, pretty much operating at line capacity, you wouldn't want to run short DMUs through to Paddington and there aren't any spare paths at Paddington so any Marlow/ Henley/ Windsor services would have to be at the expense of an existing Reading - Paddington service, so I wouldn't change them

South east London I know less about. I can see why the Bromley shuttle annoys a number of enthusiasts, it's short, it feels incomplete, especially with various other "incomplete" bits of line nearby (the Hayes branch takes up four paths per hour at busy London termini, Tramlink and the DLR aren't far away, you could waste a lot of crayon on coming up with something that ties all of these frustrating "stubs" together. Instinctively I can see it's "troublesome" to use heavy rail paths from central London on fairly short routes like Hayes or the Sutton/Wimbledon loop since there's an opportunity cost to these paths (and they could be used for longer distance/ longer trains) but it's not a hard and fast rule

But what would it achieve if Bromley - Grove Park was a through tram from Croydon or DLR to Canary Wharf, if the main demand would still be for connections into London Bridge etc? If the branch is running as frequently as it can (or wouldn't see any significant increase in frequency if it was trams/ DLR) then what's the advantage for most passengers? You could have a Bromley North - Bromley South extension but how many links does that provide (that aren't already available from the different ways of getting from the Orpington and Swanley lines to the Bromley South/ Grove Park lines)? Bromley North already seems close enough to the main shopping area, but would you be putting an intermediate station between there and Bromley South if you had a tram/DLR linking both sides of Bromley (the two existing stations are less than 1km apart)? I dunno, it feels like a lot of effort (and money) for the sake of very few genuine benefits, other than appealing to members of the BufferStopPhobic community

Perhaps Morecambe would be better served by a clock face 30 min shuttle to/from Lancaster and don’t worry about trying to connect with the mainline?

Agreed - it'd be much better with a dedicated unit, rather than hamstrung with an awkward timetable because the railway is still catering to the days of wealth Victorian Mill owners travelling from West Yorkshire to "Bradford-On-Sea"

 

[Spaceflower]

People on here really don't like terminating anything short of where it could end up (e.g. the thread about extending Glasgow - Manchester to Birmingham, but then you can't terminate things at busy old New Street so you might as well extend it through to Bristol, but then why not go the whole hog and make it Penzance... actually, it could start further north of Glasgow, maybe Inverness... no, I know, Thurso, let's start it at Thurso...) - they hate the idea of buffer stops - even if it means knocking down half of central Bradford!

Yet, when it comes to bus services, a lot of people on here love the idea of terminating bus routes at some suburban roundabout so that people are forced to change to a tram (it's apparently fine for buses to terminate in the middle of nowhere and people be forced to change, but bad if rail passengers have to change anywhere...

I share some of the frustrations with branches - they can be inefficient uses of resources, they can require non-standard stock (e.g. a diesel branch in an electrified region, the 139s for Stourbridge, the hassle in getting trains between a branch with a PVR of one and a distant depot) and therefore something to try to avoid/simplify - but that said, I can see why it might be better to have a short unit doing the shuttle than either running twelve coach trains from the main line to the branch or running short trains from the branch onto the main line... tricky

The three problems with a shuttle (as I see it) are:

1. Does it terminate at a useful destination in its own right, or at somewhere that's only really a junction?
2. Could/ Should/ Would the frequency be any better if it was a through service/ would it be better to have a reduced frequency on the branch if they were through trains?
3. Is there scope for through trains on the main line?

In the case of Cornwall, I'd suggest that Par is a pretty rubbish place to terminate Newquay services (it's not much of a destination in its own right, compared to the Falmouth branch which terminates in the regional centre of Truro) and that there's nothing stopping an increased frequency on the Newquay branch with just one unit (whereas the Falmouth branch is pretty much at capacity) and there's nothing stopping through trains from Newquay to Plymouth on a more regular basis

For the Thames Valley branches, they look fine as they are, pretty much operating at line capacity, you wouldn't want to run short DMUs through to Paddington and there aren't any spare paths at Paddington so any Marlow/ Henley/ Windsor services would have to be at the expense of an existing Reading - Paddington service, so I wouldn't change them

South east London I know less about. I can see why the Bromley shuttle annoys a number of enthusiasts, it's short, it feels incomplete, especially with various other "incomplete" bits of line nearby (the Hayes branch takes up four paths per hour at busy London termini, Tramlink and the DLR aren't far away, you could waste a lot of crayon on coming up with something that ties all of these frustrating "stubs" together. Instinctively I can see it's "troublesome" to use heavy rail paths from central London on fairly short routes like Hayes or the Sutton/Wimbledon loop since there's an opportunity cost to these paths (and they could be used for longer distance/ longer trains) but it's not a hard and fast rule

But what would it achieve if Bromley - Grove Park was a through tram from Croydon or DLR to Canary Wharf, if the main demand would still be for connections into London Bridge etc? If the branch is running as frequently as it can (or wouldn't see any significant increase in frequency if it was trams/ DLR) then what's the advantage for most passengers? You could have a Bromley North - Bromley South extension but how many links does that provide (that aren't already available from the different ways of getting from the Orpington and Swanley lines to the Bromley South/ Grove Park lines)? Bromley North already seems close enough to the main shopping area, but would you be putting an intermediate station between there and Bromley South if you had a tram/DLR linking both sides of Bromley (the two existing stations are less than 1km apart)? I dunno, it feels like a lot of effort (and money) for the sake of very few genuine benefits, other than appealing to members of the BufferStopPhobic community



Agreed - it'd be much better with a dedicated unit, rather than hamstrung with an awkward timetable because the railway is still catering to the days of wealth Victorian Mill owners travelling from West Yorkshire to "Bradford-On-Sea"

https://passenger-line-assets.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/gocornwallbus/TFCN/29-timetable-20211031-a0ec6f9d.pdf

Ignoring the issues of taking paths on the mainline and operational difficulties resulting from increased run time, turning/layovers at St Austell, etc for a moment, the purpose of theses branchline 'shuttles' is to provide a connection to the mainline for wider flows. In Cornwall, a similar example is the St. Ives branch. The main reason for being is to serve the summer holiday destinations. They're probably ghost trains in the winter (guessing here). Similarly, the GEML shuttles provide a connection to the mainline for London traffic.

As for the Morecambe branch...is there the demand for a train every 30 minutes? And even if there was, is it worth the massive load your putting on the WCML? I think not. Again, for pure Morecambe-Lancaster journets, the bus will provide much quicker and cheaper door to door journeys.

And as for Bradford, why the hell not knock it down?

I think the pure shuttle operations, particularly if they're short, probably carry the greatest potential for introducing cheaper operational practices. But I'll stop there. I don't fancy the backlash.

 

[Horizon22]

But what would it achieve if Bromley - Grove Park was a through tram from Croydon or DLR to Canary Wharf, if the main demand would still be for connections into London Bridge etc? If the branch is running as frequently as it can (or wouldn't see any significant increase in frequency if it was trams/ DLR) then what's the advantage for most passengers? You could have a Bromley North - Bromley South extension but how many links does that provide (that aren't already available from the different ways of getting from the Orpington and Swanley lines to the Bromley South/ Grove Park lines)? Bromley North already seems close enough to the main shopping area, but would you be putting an intermediate station between there and Bromley South if you had a tram/DLR linking both sides of Bromley (the two existing stations are less than 1km apart)? I dunno, it feels like a lot of effort (and money) for the sake of very few genuine benefits, other than appealing to members of the BufferStopPhobic community

Bromley North is very poorly used yet the station is in a very suitable catchment area (as is Sundridge Park to a reasonable extend). Bromley South serves Victoria and the "eastern" side of C. London/West End. Therefore some sort of connection to the DLR or maybe even an extension of the Bakerloo line (instead of the Hayes / Beckenham plan) would be more beneficial. It wouldn't be at all practical to link Bromley N & South with a rail / tram connection and it's a flat walk anyway. It's not running as frequently as it could - its basically one unit back and forth. The connections at Grove Park are not great, but that's what you get with one diagram and 5 minute (or longer) turnarounds at each end.

If Bromley North had no conflicts to access the relief lines of the SEML his wouldn't really be an issue but - much like the Windsor branch on the GWML - its now a quirk of railway geography in that it is connected to a busy mainline.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Aren’t the GEML timetable plans expected to see the Witham-Braintree revert predominately to a branch shuttle? Will be far more sensible & reliable if it does.

yes but if connections aren't good and held it will only serve to dissuade people from branch stations. This is a fundamental issue for any branch shuttle.

 

[Ken H]

https://passenger-line-assets.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/gocornwallbus/TFCN/29-timetable-20211031-a0ec6f9d.pdf

Ignoring the issues of taking paths on the mainline and operational difficulties resulting from increased run time, turning/layovers at St Austell, etc for a moment, the purpose of theses branchline 'shuttles' is to provide a connection to the mainline for wider flows. In Cornwall, a similar example is the St. Ives branch. The main reason for being is to serve the summer holiday destinations. They're probably ghost trains in the winter (guessing here). Similarly, the GEML shuttles provide a connection to the mainline for London traffic.

As for the Morecambe branch...is there the demand for a train every 30 minutes? And even if there was, is it worth the massive load your putting on the WCML? I think not. Again, for pure Morecambe-Lancaster journets, the bus will provide much quicker and cheaper door to door journeys.

And as for Bradford, why the hell not knock it down?

I think the pure shuttle operations, particularly if they're short, probably carry the greatest potential for introducing cheaper operational practices. But I'll stop there. I don't fancy the backlash.

Morecambe uses part of the west coast main line so it using much needed paths. The rest is double track with a signal bos/crossing bos at Bare lane. Wonder if some singling could cut costs. And does Morecambe need a ticket office?

 

[PeterY]

St Albans Abbey. Non-memorable timetable due to length of the route and time taken for a return trip.

But I always think that a true “shuttle service” implies only one train going back and forth, once you have two or more trains and passing on a branch then it’s no longer really a shuttle service. So Waterloo & City meets the two stations requirement, but its double track and higher frequency rules it out.

When I lived in Watford and used the service the Abbey flyer. It certainly had a non memorable timetable. Now you're lucky if it's a train. It seems mostly a bus replacement now and I don't think is good for the overall future of the line.

 

[ScottGallagher]

When I lived in Watford and used the service the Abbey flyer. It certainly had a non memorable timetable. Now you're lucky if it's a train. It seems mostly a bus replacement now and I don't think is good for the overall future of the line.

Is it possible or was it ever possible to have a direct Euston to St Albans train?

 

[MP393]

Is it possible or was it ever possible to have a direct Euston to St Albans train?

There is now it’s ran by 350s, the last service of the day comes from Euston to swap the unit

 

[Ken H]

Is it possible or was it ever possible to have a direct Euston to St Albans train?

Think it would have to come off the up fast.

 

[PeterY]

Is it possible or was it ever possible to have a direct Euston to St Albans train?

In theory it's possible, when the signalling off of the branch line around Watford Jct was updated a few years ago. I can't see it happening though without a passing loop at Bricketwood and the mainline is basically full to capacity .

 

[Spaceflower]

Morecambe uses part of the west coast main line so it using much needed paths. The rest is double track with a signal bos/crossing bos at Bare lane. Wonder if some singling could cut costs. And does Morecambe need a ticket office?

It is practically operated as a single line. Lancaster-Morecambe trains use the same line and platforms at Bare Lane and Morecambe in both directions. The once daily Lancaster-Heysham uses the 'other line' and platforms. In effect, two distinct branches run in parallel! Both sides of the 'triangle' (the WCML leads) are single line and the Heysham branch is also single with the points at Morecambe being driver operated!

 

[MP393]

In theory it's possible, when the signalling off of the branch line around Watford Jct was updated a few years ago. I can't see it happening though without a passing loop at Bricketwood and the mainline is basically full to capacity .

This is the sole direct train, it’s purpose only being to swap units rather than serve the mainline

Realtime Trains | 2F39 2110 London Euston to St Albans Abbey | 11/01/2022

Real-time train running information for 2F39 2110 departure from London Euston to St Albans Abbey on 11/01/2022. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[D6130]

In the case of Cornwall, I'd suggest that Par is a pretty rubbish place to terminate Newquay services (it's not much of a destination in its own right, compared to the Falmouth branch which terminates in the regional centre of Truro) and that there's nothing stopping an increased frequency on the Newquay branch with just one unit (whereas the Falmouth branch is pretty much at capacity) and there's nothing stopping through trains from Newquay to Plymouth on a more regular basis

IIRC, there have been various plans over the years to re-open the Burngullow-St Dennis Junction line and close Par-St Dennis, to enable the Newquay branch trains to run to/from St Austell....which is the largest town in Cornwall and a much bigger potential market for local traffic. However, the re-routed services would probably still have to run along the main line to and from Par in order to recess and turn round. However, such a plan would involve the closure of Luxulyan, Bugle and Roche, the latter two of which - I am told by friends in the area - have a reasonably healthy schools traffic.

 

[Lewlew]

The Ongar, Aldwych and South Acton shuttles are long gone, and the Wembley/Stanmore shuttle incorporated into a longer line since 1938. Woodford Hainault was to have been reinstated as a shuttle (using 4-car trains) to release some rolling stock for life-extension work on the fleet, but seems not to have happened. Not sure of the reasons, but gapping has been suggested, as has the small number of spare cabbed (A-B) units - the fleet was delivered with a small surplus of (single-ended) cabbed units over the (non-cabbed) intermediate units (B-C or B-D), but over time some of the spare cabs had been robbed of parts to repair others.

Hainault to Woodford is operated by 2 x 8 car trains.

LU still has Kensington Oylmpia to High Street Ken operated as a 2 train shuttle on weekends

 

[swt_passenger]

Hainault to Woodford is operated by 2 x 8 car trains.

LU still has Kensington Oylmpia to High Street Ken operated as a 2 train shuttle on weekends

The latter uses common tracks through Earls Court, so it isn’t an isolated shuttle on a separate branch.

 

[bavvo]

IIRC, there have been various plans over the years to re-open the Burngullow-St Dennis Junction line and close Par-St Dennis, to enable the Newquay branch trains to run to/from St Austell....which is the largest town in Cornwall and a much bigger potential market for local traffic. However, the re-routed services would probably still have to run along the main line to and from Par in order to recess and turn round. However, such a plan would involve the closure of Luxulyan, Bugle and Roche, the latter two of which - I am told by friends in the area - have a reasonably healthy schools traffic.

Wouldn't a short spur to allow the branch to join the line in a westerly direction be a lot cheaper and easier to do? Looks like there is a spur from the branch that almost touches the line at that point.

 

[janb]

Morecambe. Not enough trains to make it turn up and go, and Morecambe station is not near anywhere.

The station is 5 minutes walk from Morrisons, 5 minutes walk from the Festival Market, 5 minutes walk from the front down Northumberland Street, 5 minutes walk from the Arndale. It will be close enough to Eden Project if that happens. Morecambe is quite a sprawling place so its impossible for any station to be close to every possible point of interest but I don't get the criticism of the station location.

As for the Morecambe branch...is there the demand for a train every 30 minutes? And even if there was, is it worth the massive load your putting on the WCML? I think not. Again, for pure Morecambe-Lancaster journets, the bus will provide much quicker and cheaper door to door journeys.

Depends where your doors are I guess. As it stands the train is both quicker and cheaper for the straight forward Morecambe to Lancaster. Where the bus wins is with frequency (except today when there was no service).

 

[Spaceflower]

The station is 5 minutes walk from Morrisons, 5 minutes walk from the Festival Market, 5 minutes walk from the front down Northumberland Street, 5 minutes walk from the Arndale. It will be close enough to Eden Project if that happens. Morecambe is quite a sprawling place so its impossible for any station to be close to every possible point of interest but I don't get the criticism of the station location.


Depends where your doors are I guess. As it stands the train is both quicker and cheaper for the straight forward Morecambe to Lancaster. Where the bus wins is with frequency (except today when there was no service).

"Morecambe is quite a sprawling" and "depends were your door to door is" You've just answered your own question. On top of that, I reckon the greenway can be done in about twenty minutes if you have a bike and a hangover.

But regarding the location, I think a location more towards the seafront would be better for inward journeys. I know it wasn't the original station but across the road and the car park with the car boot sale is a run down shopping mall. That would be a decent focal point for some regeneration. Here....

 

[bavvo]

For the Thames Valley branches, they look fine as they are, pretty much operating at line capacity, you wouldn't want to run short DMUs through to Paddington and there aren't any spare paths at Paddington so any Marlow/ Henley/ Windsor services would have to be at the expense of an existing Reading - Paddington service, so I wouldn't change them

I'm probably biased, but I do feel the Henley branch could be better. It's lost the morning/evening direct trains to London completely now, missed out on electrification and right (post covid) now the timetable is only hourly. What would provide a big improvement locally would be reversing at Twyford and running through to Reading. Probably not possible now with Crossrail coming, but that would be a big improvement in usabliity. Currently there can be long waits at Twyford and Reading is a much more useful destination.

 

[dk1]

yes but if connections aren't good and held it will only serve to dissuade people from branch stations. This is a fundamental issue for any branch shuttle.

It will certainly be more reliable in the morning peak. One of the busiest services suffers from the increased frequency & severe infrastructure issues & regularly doesn’t make it up the branch at all.

 

[bramling]

The Ongar, Aldwych and South Acton shuttles are long gone, and the Wembley/Stanmore shuttle incorporated into a longer line since 1938. Woodford Hainault was to have been reinstated as a shuttle (using 4-car trains) to release some rolling stock for life-extension work on the fleet, but seems not to have happened. Not sure of the reasons, but gapping has been suggested, as has the small number of spare cabbed (A-B) units - the fleet was delivered with a small surplus of (single-ended) cabbed units over the (non-cabbed) intermediate units (B-C or B-D), but over time some of the spare cabs had been robbed of parts to repair others.

Hainault to Woodford has reverted to being a shuttle service, but using full 8-car trains.

As far as unsatisfactory shuttles go, I can give an inverse example. Mill Hill East went back to having all-day through running from September, and thusfar this has proved rather unsatisfactory. Largely because with the large number of Covid-related cancellations, the consequence of this can be 30 (or even 45) minute gaps to Mill Hill itself, but also quite long gaps from the central area branches to High Barnet. For example if two Barnet trains should happen to be cancelled either side of a Mill Hill train - that’s a 24-minute gap to Barnet from somewhere like Leicester Square, though of course there is the option to change elsewhere. This will settle down once there aren’t massive numbers of Covid cancellations, but for the time being the whole situation isn’t great.

 

[Sleepy]

The Greenford branch line seems less than ideal, especially now its a bit isolated from other GWR local services.

How many shuttle routes are there anyway? Some definitions suggest no intermediate stops, but assuming that we allow a small number of intermediate stops, and also require few/no through services, likely to be only part of most journeys rather than the whole thing, and a short distance, I can think of:

Bromley North-Grove Park
Greenford
Stourbridge
Aylesbury-Princes Risborough
Lymington
Marks Tey-Sudbury
Butetown/Cardiff Bay (but I believe this is supposed to be served by Valleys through services in the future)
GWR Henley, Marlow and Windsor services

I guess the Looe Valley and St Ives lines could count too. I feel that Par-Newquay is too long, although most travellers will use the full route and it will only be part of their journey.

In all cases I'd say they're satisfactory in one respect - they exist! So many similar services no longer do and don't always have good bus services.

St Ives line is used as the town's park and ride service and does an enormous trade plus of course the tourist trade which seems very healthy from Easter right through to end of October, 2 trains an hour service using 2× 150 is required most of the time to meet demand.
I gather Looe line passenger numbers have just grown year on year pre-pandemic, Suppose this is an easy day trip from Plymouth catchment area too ?

 

[Clayton]

It's a very useful link between the lines into Essex from Liverpool Street and Fenchurch Street. Usage has increased in recent years, partly due to people using it to get to Lakeside Shopping Centre, changing at Upminster for Chafford Hundred. I often use it to travel from Upminster towards Chelmsford & Colchester. It's also a useful alternative route into London from Upminster, which I will be using today as C2C are only running as far as Barking. I suspect that when Crossrail fully opens more people will use it to access this from Upminster.

It would be even more useful if it still ran through to Grays but that was severed by the District Line a long time ago. The line was one of only a few to be twice reprieved from closure in the 1960s & early 70s after a strong local campaign which my father was heavily involved in. Electrification couldn't see foreseen then but now under TFL we have longer operating hours and a Sunday service.

It's a shame that neither a 20 minute service or extra halts, both of which have been considered, have been introduced. There was (and still is) a good case for a halt to serve Havering Sixth Form College.

Yes the Upminster to Romford push-pull is very useful! It takes ten minutes rather than half an hour on the bus. People know the times and find the service pretty convenient.

 

[TravelDream]

Butetown/Cardiff Bay (but I believe this is supposed to be served by Valleys through services in the future)

Yes, this will cease to be a branch shuttle from the 2023.
It's one with pretty decent service already though with five services each hour to Queen Street.

It will eventually have six hourly services with 2 each to Treherbert, Aberdare and Merthyr.

 

[142blue]

That Stourbridge bus thing

 

[Zooty]

Perhaps Morecambe would be better served by a clock face 30 min shuttle to/from Lancaster and don’t worry about trying to connect with the mainline?

Ha! They gave up on trying with connections a long time ago. Now it runs when they can squeeze a path in.

Agreed - it'd be much better with a dedicated unit, rather than hamstrung with an awkward timetable because the railway is still catering to the days of wealth Victorian Mill owners travelling from West Yorkshire to "Bradford-On-Sea"

It is run with a dedicated unit, and has been for a few years now. There's only a handful of services run by units from the east and they tend to be timetabled close to the dedicated shuttle.

 

[Railcar]

The noisy diesel trains on the Exmouth - Paignton shuttle make this service very unsatisfactory. Vibration from the motors under each carriage make every journey something to be endured rather than enjoyed

 

[Dr Hoo]

That Stourbridge bus thing

In what respect is it 'unsatisfactory'? It's amazingly frequent together with being cheap to operate and relying on local staffing.

What's not to like (except, possibly, a 'number of wheels' issue)?