Liverpool to Hull direct train from December 2022

[Jorge Da Silva]

So it looks like TPE have decided to switch the Liverpool to Scarborough service with the Manchester to Hull service and change it to Liverpool to Hull and Manchester to Scarborough.

Direct rail route plan to slash 25 minutes between Hull Paragon and Liverpool Lime Street

Plans have been unveiled that could see the introduction of a direct train between Hull Paragon and Liverpool Lime Street.

www.yorkshirepost.co.uk

Direct rail route plan to slash 25 minutes between Hull Paragon and Liverpool Lime Street​

Plans have been unveiled that could see the introduction of a direct train between Hull Paragon and Liverpool Lime Street.
Rail operator TransPennine Express (TPE) is now seeking views on the proposals, which if approved, would mean a change to current Hull Paragon to Manchester Piccadilly and Scarborough to Liverpool Lime Street services.
TPE wants from December 2022 to swap these destinations including most of the calls made en route, to operate services between Hull Paragon and Liverpool Lime Street and between Scarborough and Manchester Piccadilly. And by May 2023, TPE is also looking to introduce a number of additional seasonal services in Yorkshire - between York and Scarborough – calling at Malton and Seamer, giving customers in the East of the county even more journey opportunities.
Matthew Golton, Managing Director for TransPennine Express said: “We have listened to, and worked closely with, stakeholders from across the communities we serve to create these plans, which would boost East-West connectivity between Hull and Liverpool and improve journey times.
“These amendments will give our customers more flexibility and choice and will open new commuting and leisure opportunities, giving more people more chances to explore all the North has to offer.”
Councillor Daren Hale, leader of Hull City Council, said: “It’s fantastic to see TransPennine Express working to give the people of Hull improved connectivity, faster services and a full coast-to-coast service connected some of the major towns and cities in the North.​

 

[mike57]

And we await the howls of protest from Scarborough and surrounding about an even slower service to Manchester. Politically Scarborough and Malton probably have more clout as they return Conservative MPs whereas Hull is solidly Labour, not the way it should be, but thats the reality. The underlying problem is that TPE should not be serving local stations between York, Leeds, Huddersfield and Manchester apart from maybe the occasional call at Dewsbury or Stalybridge. But thats a whole different problem which has been aired on different threads here over the last few years

 

[ainsworth74]

So it looks like TPE have decided to switch the Liverpool to Scarborough service with the Manchester to Hull service and change it to Liverpool to Hull and Manchester to Scarborough.

Direct rail route plan to slash 25 minutes between Hull Paragon and Liverpool Lime Street

Plans have been unveiled that could see the introduction of a direct train between Hull Paragon and Liverpool Lime Street.

www.yorkshirepost.co.uk

Good choice of image in the article! It's correct (right location and TOC) but a good heritage image in the form of a 158 in that transitionary livery. 10 out of 10

On a slightly more relevant tangent I think this is probably a good idea overall. Linking that string of cities makes sense and Hull/Humberside is, without wishing to denigrate the good people of Scarborough and Malton, slightly more important overall I'd have said so giving them a faster connection is logical. Plus whilst I'm sure some people use the Scarborough service beyond Leeds my understanding has been that the main flows are Scarborough/Malton - York/Leeds so giving them a worse service (though still direct) to Manchester and one change from Liverpool isn't the end of the world.

 

[Mollman]

Interesting idea, would they still use 185s or some of the spare 802s to take advantage of the sections of electrification around Manchester?

 

[James90012]

I've long thought that swap would makes sense, but it's confusing that it wasn't part of the Manchester Taskforce or ECML consultations so is a bit out of the blue!

 

[SuperNova]

I've long thought that swap would makes sense, but it's confusing that it wasn't part of the Manchester Taskforce or ECML consultations so is a bit out of the blue!

It makes more sense with TRU and diversionary routes. With any TRU block, Scarborough - Liverpool services would become a York shuttle only and Liverpool would only get one tph. This gives them 2tph while also covering off Hull politicians who keep playing the victim card in regard to services.

The underlying problem is that TPE should not be serving local stations between York, Leeds, Huddersfield and Manchester apart from maybe the occasional call at Dewsbury or Stalybridge.

Disagree, certainly Slaithwaite and Marsden have benefitted from direct services to Leeds in the peaks and when Mirfield/Batley lost their direct Manchester service in Dec 18 there was a lot of complaints. After TRU that may change but for now it's good for many.

 

[ainsworth74]

Disagree, certainly Slaithwaite and Marsden have benefitted from direct services to Leeds in the peaks and when Mirfield/Batley lost their direct Manchester service in Dec 18 there was a lot of complaints. After TRU that may change but for now it's good for many.

But that shouldn't be something provided by TPE services. Those links are important but they shouldn't be on TPE services rather on Northern services.

 

[SuperNova]

But that shouldn't be something provided by TPE services. Those links are important but they shouldn't be on TPE services rather on Northern services.

And Northern don't have the rolling stock to keep to time, TPE do. Plus, as part of TRU, local stops are being incorporated into services when there are blocks on - makes sense for these services to be run by TPE until TRU is completed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But that shouldn't be something provided by TPE services. Those links are important but they shouldn't be on TPE services rather on Northern services.

The reason they're on TPE services is primarily because TPE has surplus rolling stock and Northern don't, and so it's easier for TPE to operate the services than for half the 185s to be transferred to Northern.

I retain my view that TPE and Northern should never have been split, anyway.

 

[ainsworth74]

And Northern don't have the rolling stock to keep to time, TPE do. Plus, as part of TRU, local stops are being incorporated into services when there are blocks on - makes sense for these services to be run by TPE until TRU is completed.

The reason they're on TPE services is primarily because TPE has surplus rolling stock and Northern don't, and so it's easier for TPE to operate the services than for half the 185s to be transferred to Northern.

I retain my view that TPE and Northern should never have been split, anyway.

Yes I don't necessarily disagree with any of that. But the point remains they shouldn't be part of TPE. Yes, in the reality we find ourselves in they are and that seems to be the only vaguely sensible way of doing so. But they shouldn't be and the fact that they have to be causes problems for TPE trying to serve the markets that they actually should be serving. Someone on North TPE ends up having to have a slower journey time because one of the end destinations (Hull, Scarborough, Middlesbrough/Redcar, Newcastle) has to pick up local intermediate stops because at the moment there's no other way of doing so. My local TPE service (Redcar - Manchester Airport) has a call at Gatley down at the Manchester end. There's no real reason for Gatley to get calls on TPE services going through to Leeds, York and Middlesbrough. But I bet it's the only way of maintaining the service at Gatley.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes I don't necessarily disagree with any of that. But the point remains they shouldn't be part of TPE. Yes, in the reality we find ourselves in they are and that seems to be the only vaguely sensible way of doing so. But they shouldn't be and the fact that they have to be causes problems for TPE trying to serve the markets that they actually should be serving. Someone on North TPE ends up having to have a slower journey time because one of the end destinations (Hull, Scarborough, Middlesbrough/Redcar, Newcastle) has to pick up local intermediate stops because at the moment there's no other way of doing so. My local TPE service (Redcar - Manchester Airport) has a call at Gatley down at the Manchester end. There's no real reason for Gatley to get calls on TPE services going through to Leeds, York and Middlesbrough. But I bet it's the only way of maintaining the service at Gatley.

But that applies all over the railway. The less important/lower demand destinations get slower trains. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with that.

The other option is that you turn TPE into a pure IC operator, but if you do that there's little argument for it not to simply be a Liverpool/Manchester Piccadilly to Newcastle service 4 times an hour (2 fast, 2 semifast) with everything else a connection. But TPE as it is is really a set of joined regional expresses, which work better for everyone. It now has fancy trains, of course, but those fancy trains don't make it equivalent to an Avanti fast Glasgow or an LNER fast Edinburgh.

As for that service going to Manchester Airport at all, you know my view on that.

 

[Watershed]

Yes I don't necessarily disagree with any of that. But the point remains they shouldn't be part of TPE. Yes, in the reality we find ourselves in they are and that seems to be the only vaguely sensible way of doing so. But they shouldn't be and the fact that they have to be causes problems for TPE trying to serve the markets that they actually should be serving. Someone on North TPE ends up having to have a slower journey time because one of the end destinations (Hull, Scarborough, Middlesbrough/Redcar, Newcastle) has to pick up local intermediate stops because at the moment there's no other way of doing so. My local TPE service (Redcar - Manchester Airport) has a call at Gatley down at the Manchester end. There's no real reason for Gatley to get calls on TPE services going through to Leeds, York and Middlesbrough. But I bet it's the only way of maintaining the service at Gatley.

The colour of the trains doesn't really matter. The calling pattern does, but until TRU (and NPR) are complete, the only way to deliver a 2tph service at the local stations between Manchester and Huddersfield is to add the calls into one of the 'express' services.

Unfortunately whether that express is a Hull or Scarborough service, someone is going to complain. But I would argue Scarborough is probably the 'least worst' as SCA-MAN is a smaller flow than HUL-MAN. It'll also be good to have 2tph direct from Piccadilly to York, albeit they are unlikely to be particularly clockface.

Gatley is a separate issue, but suffice it to say the train would take that length of time to get to Manchester Airport one way or the other, so it may as well call and improve local connectivity.

 

[CJ]

As someone that lives close by to the Styal line, the TPE service that currently calls at Gatley has been very convenient as it goes direct to both Manchester Piccadilly (Redcar bound) or to Manchester Airport. It being 6 carriages long has been very useful also and I have noticed many passengers boarding this train, especially weekends.

Looking at the Northern December 2022 Consultation Timetable proposed, it appears:

- TPE will no longer be calling at this station Monday - Saturday,
- Northern's Manchester Airport - Barrow/Windermere will replace it instead on Monday - Saturday,

However on Sundays:

- TPE will remain calling at this station (as it is now),
- Northern's Barrow/Windermere service being Heald Green and East Didsbury only.

So Gatley should have 3tph to Manchester Piccadilly/Airport on Monday - Saturday only from Dec 22 (hopefully!)

 

[nr758123]

The colour of the trains doesn't really matter. The calling pattern does, but until TRU (and NPR) are complete, the only way to deliver a 2tph service at the local stations between Manchester and Huddersfield is to add the calls into one of the 'express' services.

As one of those passengers who uses the trains at Slaithwaite, I am happy to confirm that I have no interest whatsoever in what livery is on the outside. I do, however, have an interest in it being clean, comfortable and reasonably punctual. Given the current capacity constraints of the route, provision by TPE appears to be the most effective way of providing that. If it enables 2tph, then that is also good.

 

[mike57]

As one of those passengers who uses the trains at Slaithwaite, I am happy to confirm that I have no interest whatsoever in what livery is on the outside. I do, however, have an interest in it being clean, comfortable and reasonably punctual. Given the current capacity constraints of the route, provision by TPE appears to be the most effective way of providing that. If it enables 2tph, then that is also good.

I think the problem is that none of the travellers from the Eastern ends of the route want to have a slower service, and if you are going to have a clockface timetable then one of the eastern extremities has a poor journey. Its not just the time, its the passenger churn if you travelling for 2hours + to Manchester.

Really the whole thing is a series of incompatible requirements. Its not about who runs the trains, its about the capacity of the Leeds Manchester corridor, which is inadequate, and the fact that local passenger services need different rolling stock to that needed for longer journeys e.g. Scarborough Manchester. For long journeys the 185s are worse for long runs in terms of comfort, but better suited to the local service provision.

As a regular Scarborough - Manchester traveller I can vouch for the fact that 185s with their 1/3 2/3 doors and no vestibules are miserable on a long journey on a hot or cold day. An icy/furnace like blast every 10 - 15 mins. In this respect the Mk5s are much nicer, I know there are problems with them, but the basic concept works. But Mk5s on local stops are a recipe for delays as it takes time for people to get on and off.

 

[30907]

Historical note: long before Liverpool-Scarborough existed, the original TP units operated Liverpool-Hull.

 

[Gathursty]

Liverpool to Hull at least satisfies the government's objective to connect the M62 corridor cities albeit its not at all the all singing and dancing Northern Powerhouse project.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Historical note: long before Liverpool-Scarborough existed, the original TP units operated Liverpool-Hull.

Probably made more sense in the days of less flying and them both being important passenger ports.

 

[gazzaa2]

Liverpool to Hull at least satisfies the government's objective to connect the M62 corridor cities albeit its not at all the all singing and dancing Northern Powerhouse project.

The M62 starts in Manchester and ends in Leeds for all the government knows.

 

[Gathursty]

The M62 starts in Manchester and ends in Leeds for all the government knows.

You know my inner geek is going to spend the next hour looking at why the M62 becomes the A63 so far away from Hull.

 

[30907]

You know my inner geek is going to spend the next hour looking at why the M62 becomes the A63 so far away from Hull.

Not to motorway standard - though at least the traffic jam lights at Melton were replaced by a bridge a few years ago.
I wonder if there were also issues about "non-motorway traffic" needing to use bits.

 

[ABB125]

Not to motorway standard

However that can't be the reason it becomes an A-road, as surely the M62/A63 were built at the same time. The question should be "why was the decision made to build the bit which is now the A63 to a lower standard?". I'd have thought that the logical place to end the motorway would be the Humber bridge.

 

[dk1]

Makes sense if I’m being honest.

 

[SuperNova]

Really the whole thing is a series of incompatible requirements. Its not about who runs the trains, its about the capacity of the Leeds Manchester corridor, which is inadequate, and the fact that local passenger services need different rolling stock to that needed for longer journeys

Which is why TRU is happening and the very watered down version of NPR or whatever it ends up being badged as. However, peak stops at stations such as Slaithwaite and Marsden attract more customers to the railway. Direct service from Slaithwaite to Leeds is 25 mins. No reason why in certain instances services at 'peak' times can't pick up extra stops.

But Mk5s on local stops are a recipe for delays as it takes time for people to get on and off.

They won't be used on local stops unless in rare circumstances, 185s will be.

 

[yorkie]

Just a gentle reminder for any speculation to be in the speculative discussion area please

So it looks like TPE have decided to switch the Liverpool to Scarborough service with the Manchester to Hull service and change it to Liverpool to Hull and Manchester to Scarborough.

Direct rail route plan to slash 25 minutes between Hull Paragon and Liverpool Lime Street

Plans have been unveiled that could see the introduction of a direct train between Hull Paragon and Liverpool Lime Street.

www.yorkshirepost.co.uk

It is a proposal, not a decision

 

[JRT]

Historical note: long before Liverpool-Scarborough existed, the original TP units operated Liverpool-Hull.

Historical note: long before Liverpool-Scarborough existed, the original TP units operated Liverpool-Hull.

I remember a regular Blackpool North–Scarborough service (RRNE ?)

 

[mike57]

However that can't be the reason it becomes an A-road, as surely the M62/A63 were built at the same time. The question should be "why was the decision made to build the bit which is now the A63 to a lower standard?". I'd have thought that the logical place to end the motorway would be the Humber bridge.

Interestingly both projects were started around the same time, but the M62/A63 opened in around 1976, and the Humber Bridge opened in 1981. I used the M62/A63 route occasionally in the late 70's and traffic levels were much lower than today. The dual carriageway A63 finished at the outskirts of Hull. Even the lights at Melton were just a minor blip on an otherwise quiet road. At the time the provision was more than adequate.

 

[Asmo]

Traffic levels have grown over the intervening years with the A63/A1033 trunk route providing direct access to the docks. Looking at recent statistics sections of the A63 are carrying 62,000 vehicles a day resulting in numerous closures due to accidents. Upgrading the route to motorway standards is not on the agenda so any improvements to rail journeys both passenger and freight operations would be a positive move.

 

[JRT]

Makes sense if I’m being honest.

I agree. The market is mainly Leeds–Scarborough as covered by the RRNE trains in the past, many connections in Leeds. I did hear a rumour that York–Scarborough was to be covered by NORTHERN with all the other lines electrified. I think the Transpennine pre-covid timetable was developed with a consistent Manchester Victoria (fast) to York 15–min frequency in mind but current proposals will drop this anyway.

 

[geoffk]

Historical note: long before Liverpool-Scarborough existed, the original TP units operated Liverpool-Hull.

This seems a sensible proposal if only because the Scarborough train has to cross junctions at both ends of York, with bits of single track on the SCA line, and any delay can cause knock-on-effects as far as Liverpool.