Integrating the east coast

[MCR247]

umm, there are a load of trains to the north & scotland under there under both NXEC and XC

there's also the EMT Norwich-Liverpool service represented, but i only show it where it uses the ECML i.e. Peterborough-Grantham. There are no current direct services from east anglia i.e. Norwich, Cambridge, to the northeast and Scotland, it is necessary to change once.

4tph is plenty for cambridge, especially is these are 12 coach trains. I'm also not including trains to Liverpool Street via the WAML, of which I imagine there'll be at least 2tph, which will also be 12 car. Does cambridge need 8 12 car trains to london ber hour? no.

As for Edinburgh-Berwick, i don't see the point in running two trains when one will do. As for crew changings, it could be done, as Berwick will be roundabout the changeover point. I do, however, think there's a market for a more regular service bewteen The North Sea Coast intermediate stations, and that it's more efficient to serve this with a through service, rather than an express.

Do NXEA use 12 car 317s to Cambridge?

What stock would ScotRail use? When fTPE could use 185s extended fromNewcastle

 

[stut]

Unless I'm reading it wrong, I can only see one fast north from Peterborough every 2 hours, which is pretty poor, given the importance of the interchange.

The number of trains per hour at CBG is irrelevant unless you consider the timings: you can have 15 semi-fasts, but is the 2 fasts overtake them, those are the ones that will get full. Add in a bunch of passengers from stations en route, and you'll still have chronic overcrowding.

ARL-HUN looking pretty hard done by still. These are busy commuter stations precisely because of the timings at present, and draw people in from a long way around. You should see the size of the car park at SNO for the size of the town...

Better than I thought, but I still don't think there's any part of the FCC network you can reduce capacity on, which is what you've effectively done.

 

[Waverley125]

Peterborough has a 2-hourly service to Scotland, but an hourly frequency to Newcastle, where changes are possible onto at least 2tph to Scotland. Also another train every 2 hours to york, where the change onto AXC scotland services is possible. Also 2tph to leeds, where (if other, non ECML plans of mine were accepted) there'd be a chance onto an hourly service to Glasgow Central).

At the end of the day, it's not possible to give all things to all people, unless there are siginificant capacity improvements. Personally, i think that we should be trying to get the ECML upgraded in the same way as the WCML, with four tracks all the way to Newcastle in stages, to peterborough, then Doncaster, then York.... Then it'd be possible to run a half-hourly service to Scotland, have Leeds-Scotland trains run by NXEC, greater TPE, AXC, Northern and FSR frequency etc. At present, i don't think the East Anglia-Scotland market justifies more than 1tp2h, especially as with Stansted in the locality, it will be a lot longer. Don't forget, for essex and some of suffolk, it may well be quicker to go via London.

As for Cambridge, non stop journey time is 50 mins, 1 hour with limited stop. IMO calling only Stevenage, Hitchin, Letchworth could probably be done in just under 1 hour.

Meanwhile, limited stops to Liverpool Street is 1hr 10, while all stops is 1hr 27. Surely calling only Audley End and Bishops Stortford, it could be done in about 1 hour? And there's space on the line to run a fast, 2 semis and a stopper every hour. So Cambridge would have 8, 12 car trains per hour, with a fastest journey time to Kings Cross of 57 minutes or so, and to Liverpool Street of around 1 hour 5 mins.

Christ, it'll be the best served city in the east for trains to London.

 

[MCR247]

At the end of the day, it's not possible to give all things to all people, unless there are siginificant capacity improvements. Personally, i think that we should be trying to get the ECML upgraded in the same way as the WCML, with four tracks all the way to Newcastle in stages, to peterborough, then Doncaster, then York.... Then it'd be possible to run a half-hourly service to Scotland, have Leeds-Scotland trains run by NXEC, greater TPE, AXC, Northern and FSR frequency etc. At present, i don't think the East Anglia-Scotland market justifies more than 1tp2h, especially as with Stansted in the locality, it will be a lot longer. Don't forget, for essex and some of suffolk, it may well be quicker to go via London.

So Leeds already has an XC service to Scotland, whereas anglia dosent, but yet leeds need an extra HOURLY to Glasgow?! :roll::roll:

 

[mathmo]

As for Cambridge, non stop journey time is 50 mins, 1 hour with limited stop. IMO calling only Stevenage, Hitchin, Letchworth could probably be done in just under 1 hour.

The non-stop trains from Cambridge to London are very popular. Every time I have been on one recently (admittedly not that often, but I always travel off-peak) they have been pretty full (few, if any, spare seats on a 4-car train). It can be done in little more than 45 minutes on a good run (though is generally timetabled at 50ish) - you'd be annoying a lot of Cambridge if you changed these!

Also I believe only platforms 1 and 4 combined at Cambridge can take a 12-coach train: I don't think the bays are long enough (though I may be wrong) so more than the occasional 12-coach train would substantially reduce capacity.

 

[Waverley125]

it's a poor designed station. I'd like to see an 2-face Island platform built, as it'd give a huge boost to the capacity of the station.

Leeds would have 2 XC services (Newcastle/Scotland) every hour, giving it 2tph to Newcastle and 1tph Edinburgh & Beyond. Getting to Glasgow from leeds is a royal pain-either via XC to Edinburgh & change for Queen Street, Northern to Lancaster & Change for Virgin or over to Manchester, and then TPE.

Leeds-Glasgow is a pretty big market, but awfully served. A direct hourly service via the S&C would give a much better journey time, and provide better links between Southern Scotland, Cumbria & Yorkshire.

 

[stut]

The thing is, 45-50 minutes is an acceptable, mass-market commute. Over an hour isn't. If the Stansted Express is a solid 45 minutes, you're not going to get to CBG in under an hour that way. NXEA are practically giving away off-peak tickets on this route, but still people go on the erstwhile 'Cambridge Cruiser'. Because it's a fast, good service.

You're never going to be all things to all people, of course not. However, downgrading the services you have at present, particularly when they're already oversubscribed, is never going to wash. Particularly not when you're talking major, expensive commuter services: like it or not, these are the bread and butter of the railways.

Of course, the answer is an upgrade in capacity.

The Tokaido Shinkansen has it right with long-distance stopping patterns. We could learn a lot from such things.

There are three speeds of train: slow, semi-fast and fast.

Slow stops everywhere. Almost all stations are on loops.
Semi-fast stops at all interchange points.
Fast stops at major interchange points.

Even the fastest trains stop at the major stops on the way out of Tokyo - be it Shinagawa or Ueno. It would be madness not to pick people up from the outer suburbs.

 

[me123]

Leeds would have 2 XC services (Newcastle/Scotland) every hour, giving it 2tph to Newcastle and 1tph Edinburgh & Beyond.

Don't they also already have the TPE services plugging the gaps for Leeds-Newcastle? They don't seem to be that much slower. That said, Leeds would benefit from the 2tph for travel to Birmingham and beyond as well. However, I think it's essential that these should not come at the loss of direct services to Doncaster.

Leeds-Glasgow is a pretty big market, but awfully served. A direct hourly service via the S&C would give a much better journey time, and provide better links between Southern Scotland, Cumbria & Yorkshire.

Hourly is a bit ambitious. However, a few direct trains a day via the S&C would be fantastic for both cities. For this to work, though, speed increases on the Settle and Carlisle Line would be needed to make it competitive.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . . However, a few direct trains a day via the S&C would be fantastic for both cities. For this to work, though, speed increases on the Settle and Carlisle Line would be needed to make it competitive.

The costs for that upgrade would be very interesting. With some corresponding improvements in West Yorkshire there is the potential to provide some truly effective national links using an efficicient link between Glasgow and Yorkshire.
(One of the propblems that would then arise is the difficulty of linking onwards to the north having reached Glasgow central!)

 

[djw1981]

But a Glasgow - Notts via Leeds could be competitive., Currently this is between 1 and 3 changes.

 

[tbtc]

Leeds-Glasgow is a pretty big market, but awfully served. A direct hourly service via the S&C would give a much better journey time, and provide better links between Southern Scotland, Cumbria & Yorkshire.

Is it really that big a market?

I'd argue that there's more demand for Glaswegians going to Blackpool or Liverpool, both of which it lacks.

Similarly, Leeds to Birmingham is only hourly - surely that's a much bigger market than to Glasgow?

 

[Pumbaa]

Similarly, Leeds to Birmingham is only hourly - surely that's a much bigger market than to Glasgow?

Absolutely - although changing at Doncaster/Sheffield isn't that much of a hardship.

 

[MCR247]

Absolutely - although changing at Doncaster/Sheffield isn't that much of a hardship.

Neither is changing at york for glasgow

 

[Waverley125]

well Glasgow Trains' research has shown there is a good market for a direct Leeds-Glasgow service, so I believe them. Especially as I'm doing it soon, and route planner almost always sends you west coast to Lancaster or via Manchester.

 

[tbtc]

well Glasgow Trains' research has shown there is a good market for a direct Leeds-Glasgow service, so I believe them. Especially as I'm doing it soon, and route planner almost always sends you west coast to Lancaster or via Manchester.

One problem they'll have is that there's very few places of population in between - you're relying on "end to end" traffic because Carlisle is the only place with any size to it.

 

[me123]

Three or four trains a day Glasgow-Leeds and return is feasible. Enough people fly between the two, and both are large economic and business centres with vast commuter networks.

 

[djw1981]

IIRC Glasgow trains were proposing Glasgow - Nottingham via Leeds, that would be more popular.

 

[OMGitsDAVE]

In my opinion (living on the east coast, Hartlepool) the following services should commence:
1tph Sunderland - London (From Newcastle is not feasable as NORTHERN operate from Newcastle - Middlesbrough (hourly))
1tph Middlesbrough - London (This service would allow a half hourly service along the route south of Eaglescliffe)
1tph London - Glasgow (First stop York) then Darlington, Newcastle, Berwick, Waverley, Haymarket & Glasgow
1tph Leeds - Glasgow (as mentioned in above posts)
1tph London - Leeds
1tph London - Newcastle (Calling at all intermediate stations)

& therefore the East Coast Mainline is refreshed (all stations on here are north of Leeds - so sticking to the main area of the ECML)

This would allow a high frequency of trains running, and this would not stop the revenue on NORTHERN or First Transpennine Express.