Modern Railways GA piece this month

[Adrian1980uk]

I noticed not only Jamie Burles confirmed premiums going to treasury and 104% revenue in monetary terms excluding inflation, he also talks about replace the 755s with a Stansted express unit on the IC run for extra capacity which to me implies 720s will be used frequently on the Stansted run from Dec.

The most interesting bit is he implies the GEML recast is looking like June 24, with faster journey times - not Norwich in 90 but if most got to 1hr 45, very achievable if enough time can be allowed after the stopping service in front so the IC doesn't catch it, I was on a peak service that basically got to just before Colchester 10mins early and then waited.

Fact remains though its very limited what can be done on a 2 track railway.

 

[Essexman]

Will the loop at the new Beauleiu Park station help much with pathing.

 

[Gerald Fiennes]

In terms of premiums to the Treasury, please don't get too excited. Currently, much of NR's day-to-day and renewals costs are paid directly to them by DfT. So the premiums are from what GA is directly earning through fares, less its own operating costs which include the small proportion of NR costs they actuallly pay. All of the franchised/DOR TOCs work in this way....

 

[Adrian1980uk]

In terms of premiums to the Treasury, please don't get too excited. Currently, much of NR's day-to-day and renewals costs are paid directly to them by DfT. So the premiums are from what GA is directly earning through fares, less its own operating costs which include the small proportion of NR costs they actuallly pay. All of the franchised/DOR TOCs work in this way....

While very true, that's a fixed grant set up for the next 5 years and will be paid even if the TOCs were making billions, take your point that premiums can't be taken in isolation but it is positive for GA and hopefully will give the management a bit more freedom to improve services

 

[306024]

Will the loop at the new Beauleiu Park station help much with pathing.

Not necessarily. Any looped train will have slower end to end journey times than currently.

Fact remains though its very limited what can be done on a 2 track railway.

Exactly. Effectively the two Freightliner paths per hour dictate what can be realistically done.

 

[43066]

The most interesting bit is he implies the GEML recast is looking like June 24, with faster journey times - not Norwich in 90 but if most got to 1hr 45, very achievable if enough time can be allowed after the stopping service in front so the IC doesn't catch it, I was on a peak service that basically got to just before Colchester 10mins early and then waited.

As someone who doesn’t know much about the GA network, what is the reason that Norwich in 90 can’t still be achieved? Intuitively it would seem easier to achieve with (presumably?) still lower traffic levels than pre Covid.

I assume the EL service running on the Electric Lines will have an impact on capacity in the London section of the route.

 

[hwl]

As someone who doesn’t know much about the GA network, what is the reason that Norwich in 90 can’t still be achieved?

It is achieved by removing virtually all the stops but there just weren't that many London-Norwich passengers pre Covid and even fewer now.

The passenger numbers for the intermediate stations missed out were(/are) far higher.
The original (long dead) plan was to run a stopping service just after the NiNies to deal with that demand.

Covid lead to the obvious conclusion that carting fresh air around while leaving other waiting as they never really got the extra service running wasn't a good plan.

Next May is the opportunity to adapt the timetable to the better (now proven) performance of 745s and 720s compared to a 321s/ or 90/mk3 base line and reduce timings overall.

Intuitively it would seem easier to achieve with (presumably?) still lower traffic levels than pre Covid.

I assume the EL service running on the Electric Lines will have an impact on capacity in the London section of the route.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

As someone who doesn’t know much about the GA network, what is the reason that Norwich in 90 can’t still be achieved? Intuitively it would seem easier to achieve with (presumably?) still lower traffic levels than pre Covid.

I assume the EL service running on the Electric Lines will have an impact on capacity in the London section of the route.

Also to note, there aren't that many fewer trains on the GEML compared to pre COVID so still not easily achieved, basically could be if track was clear in front but generally most IC get stuck behind a stopper in front at some point in their journey

 

[43066]

It is achieved by removing virtually all the stops but there just weren't that many London-Norwich passengers pre Covid and even fewer now.

The passenger numbers for the intermediate stations missed out were(/are) far higher.
The original (long dead) plan was to run a stopping service just after the NiNies to deal with that demand.

Covid lead to the obvious conclusion that carting fresh air around while leaving other waiting as they never really got the extra service running wasn't a good plan.

Next May is the opportunity to adapt the timetable to the better (now proven) performance of 745s and 720s compared to a 321s/ or 90/mk3 base line and reduce timings overall.

Also to note, there aren't that many fewer trains on the GEML compared to pre COVID so still not easily achieved, basically could be if track was clear in front but generally most IC get stuck behind a stopper in front at some point in their journey

Thanks both.

 

[Bald Rick]

As someone who doesn’t know much about the GA network, what is the reason that Norwich in 90 can’t still be achieved? Intuitively it would seem easier to achieve with (presumably?) still lower traffic levels than pre Covid.

I assume the EL service running on the Electric Lines will have an impact on capacity in the London section of the route.

The business case was not good, and presumably is worse now. To achieve 90 mins for a couple of hundred passengers per train meant that several thousand others had their journeys slowed down (some by as much as 9 minutes) by being looped out of the way etc.

 

[dk1]

The business case was not good, and presumably is worse now. To achieve 90 mins for a couple of hundred passengers per train meant that several thousand others had their journeys slowed down (some by as much as 9 minutes) by being looped out of the way etc.

They still have as all the paths for the Ni90 remain in the working timetable.

 

[Bald Rick]

They still have as all the paths for the Ni90 remain in the working timetable.

I dont think they do - the paths have long since been amended. E.g. the 1700 still runs but to a slower schedule. And some of the trains rhat were shoved out of the way dont even run now.

The access rights may still exist, but that’s a different matter.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

The business case was not good, and presumably is worse now. To achieve 90 mins for a couple of hundred passengers per train meant that several thousand others had their journeys slowed down (some by as much as 9 minutes) by being looped out of the way etc.

Now with the 745s / 755s performance it's better to look at the timetable in the round and settle on 1 hour 45 for most trains for example rather than 90 for the odd train. Reality is though the stoppers will always be limiting factors unless a lot of money is spent making it a 4 track railway.

Also I note reliable timetabling in the circumstances on the GEML is not easy.. how larger gap do you really need between a Harwich stopper for example and a Norwich 'fast'? But it's peak and you need another 4 trains to fit in... Can you loop the stopper, how long in reality do you allow to hold it if the Norwich fast is late and trying to make up time before the timetable collapsed.

 

[Gerald Fiennes]

Think of it as a railway in two sections: Liv St to Ipswich and beyond.

We used to be able to run a fast to Ipswich in just under an hour in the xx30 slot, with just one call at Colchester. Perhaps a couple of the semis that now run outbound as far Shenfield in eg. between 0830 and 0930 could be dropped for that hour only, as the 0830 fast slot has been eroded.

After Ipswich, it's easier The EMR/GA services to Ely could run off pattern from eg. 0940 to 1010 in the Norwich area to make it easier to get through that infernal swing bridge. It's not like the timing to Ely is that critical, whereas having at least one 'superfast' train is something that GA (or whoever runs it in future, ER?) could get out and market and that would make an impact in Norfolk. It's not as if cars or coaches could ever match 90 mins!

Sure, there are lots of operational challenges (I spent hours on these trains in earlier decades and was able to travel, so know all about them...) but from my perch up here in the clouds it feels like the railway has lost its imagination in a sea of PPM data. You have these nice, reliable electrics now. They can accelerate like a bat out of hell, if needed (Britannias could never do that....). Give the staff something to aim for! Why not revisit the balance between journey times and performance for crack trains?

Otherwise, East Anglia will just keep feeling more more and more like the distant end of a 21st Century version of the District Line: a turnipped version of Upminster! Might even try and getting the odd direct back to Saxmundham....but let's save that one.

 

[dk1]

I dont think they do - the paths have long since been amended. E.g. the 1700 still runs but to a slower schedule. And some of the trains rhat were shoved out of the way dont even run now.

The access rights may still exist, but that’s a different matter.

They are really just a modifications to the schedule that could be altered. Jonathan Denby at GA hopes to resurect them in some form in the future. The 08:00up/17:00dn did resume briefly during the pandemic before further lockdowns saw them removed. Ironically I never got to work one even in 90/DVT days

Local stakeholders would like it to return after campaigning for so many years.

 

[306024]

They are really just a modifications to the schedule that could be altered. Jonathan Denby at GA hopes to resurect them in some form in the future. The 08:00up/17:00dn did resume briefly during the pandemic before further lockdowns saw them removed. Ironically I never got to work one even in 90/DVT days

Local stakeholders would like it to return after campaigning for so many years.

Well it keeps in with the politicians, but as we know they’re the worst people to run a railway.

But as stated the damage it does to other journey opportunities in the south end of the patch, both with journey time and connectivity, is arguably worse than the benefit of having these so called flagship one off trains.

Think of it as a railway in two sections: Liv St to Ipswich and beyond.

After Ipswich, it's easier The EMR/GA services to Ely could run off pattern from eg. 0940 to 1010 in the Norwich area to make it easier to get through that infernal swing bridge. It's not like the timing to Ely is that critical, whereas having at least one 'superfast' train is something that GA (or whoever runs it in future, ER?) could get out and market and that would make an impact in Norfolk. It's not as if cars or coaches could ever match 90 mins!

Ipswich to Haughley is another pinch point with the cross country freight. Getting everything to match up is certainly a challenge at times. Cars or coaches couldn’t match 105 minutes either!

 

[Adrian1980uk]

They are really just a modifications to the schedule that could be altered. Jonathan Denby at GA hopes to resurect them in some form in the future. The 08:00up/17:00dn did resume briefly during the pandemic before further lockdowns saw them removed. Ironically I never got to work one even in 90/DVT days

Local stakeholders would like it to return after campaigning for so many years.

Let's see what the May/June timetable change brings, not necessarily bringing back ni90s but some reduction in times and if there's still slots for that option.

I still recon given the performance of 745s you could do it 90 mins and stop at all the stations it does today if the track was clear.

 

[RailWonderer]

I still recon given the performance of 745s you could do it 90 mins and stop at all the stations it does today if the track was clear.

I think 1h 40 is more realistic, the timetable has excessive slack which was even slack for 90/DVT sets.

They are really just a modifications to the schedule that could be altered. Jonathan Denby at GA hopes to resurect them in some form in the future. The 08:00up/17:00dn did resume briefly during the pandemic before further lockdowns saw them removed. Ironically I never got to work one even in 90/DVT days

Local stakeholders would like it to return after campaigning for so many years.

I think the 17:00 down could do it in 90 mins by removing the Maningtree call if need be, which was added when Covid ended.
The morning service could remove a Colchester call and you wouldn't even need to run extra dedicated Ni90 services once the timetable is sped up. I would mark out the 08:30 up for an Ni90 and remove the Colchester call. The 07:03 has to deal with the morning peak so better to avoid.

The business case was not good, and presumably is worse now. To achieve 90 mins for a couple of hundred passengers per train meant that several thousand others had their journeys slowed down (some by as much as 9 minutes) by being looped out of the way etc.

I agree the majority were inconvenienced (I was one of them).

 

[dk1]

Let's see what the May/June timetable change brings, not necessarily bringing back ni90s but some reduction in times and if there's still slots for that option.

I still recon given the performance of 745s you could do it 90 mins and stop at all the stations it does today if the track was clear.

Yes they really are rockets with instant power. Most Sundays up services when the full route is open can easily complete the journey in a shade over 1h40 with six stops and have excessive dwell times at Ipswich & Colchester & to some extent Stowmarket. It’s normally green lights all the way from Colchester to Stratford & of course once there we don’t have to wait departure time but it is so busy these days that closing the doors & getting away quickly isn’t always possible.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

Yes they really are rockets with instant power. Most Sundays up services when the full route is open can easily complete the journey in a shade over 1h40 with six stops and have excessive dwell times at Ipswich & Colchester & to some extent Stowmarket. It’s normally green lights all the way from Colchester to Stratford & of course once there we don’t have to wait departure time but it is so busy these days that closing the doors & getting away quickly isn’t always possible.

Yesterday was very busy, 9 of the 10 standard class showing as full both ways, won't be long before the missing peaks are justified and that would be greater capacity than pre pandemic.

 

[dk1]

Yesterday was very busy, 9 of the 10 standard class showing as full both ways, won't be long before the missing peaks are justified and that would be greater capacity than pre pandemic.

Seeing this more and more. Trouble is having enough 745s available daily to reintroduce the 06:48 Norwich-Liverpool St & 18:10 return (SX).

 

[306024]

This 07.24 Ipswich to Liverpool St (08.43) now runs. Effectively arriving Liverpool St in the path of the 06.48 Norwich to Liverpool St, but with additional Colchester, Chelmsford and Stratford stops. Introduced under short term planning, it becomes permanent in the December timetable change:

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:L13865/2023-12-01/detailed

As a result the boat train from Harwich International, such as it now is, is re-instated:

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:F37359/2023-12-01/detailed

 

[Adrian1980uk]

This 07.24 Ipswich to Liverpool St (08.43) now runs. Effectively arriving Liverpool St in the path of the 06.48 Norwich to Liverpool St, but with additional Colchester, Chelmsford and Stratford stops. Introduced under short term planning, it becomes permanent in the December timetable change:

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:L13865/2023-12-01/detailed

As a result the boat train from Harwich International, such as it now is, is re-instated:

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:F37359/2023-12-01/detailed

That's fairly easy to extend to Norwich from a path point of view, the only stop that would be extra hours is Chelmsford but not enough 745s to run it

 

[dk1]

That's fairly easy to extend to Norwich from a path point of view, the only stop that would be extra hours is Chelmsford but not enough 745s to run it

Unfortunately being a 720 no Norwich or Ipswich drivers sign them and Colchester do not sign the route north of Haughley Jcn.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I noticed not only Jamie Burles confirmed premiums going to treasury and 104% revenue in monetary terms excluding inflation, he also talks about replace the 755s with a Stansted express unit on the IC run for extra capacity which to me implies 720s will be used frequently on the Stansted run from Dec.

The most interesting bit is he implies the GEML recast is looking like June 24, with faster journey times - not Norwich in 90 but if most got to 1hr 45, very achievable if enough time can be allowed after the stopping service in front so the IC doesn't catch it, I was on a peak service that basically got to just before Colchester 10mins early and then waited.

Fact remains though its very limited what can be done on a 2 track railway.

GA run a "boringly reliable" service day in day out and NR Anglia infrastructure plays nicely as well so that clearly has helped support repeat custom to drive up revenue. Also sounds like Treasury/DfT will support improvements when the finances are good.

 

[greaterangrier]

It is achieved by removing virtually all the stops but there just weren't that many London-Norwich passengers pre Covid and even fewer now.

The passenger numbers for the intermediate stations missed out were(/are) far higher.

Using the Origin/Destination matrix data from the other thread, here's the top destinations for London Liverpool St along the GEML:

1. Chelmsford - 940k
2. Shenfield - 560k
3. Billericay - 390k
4. Norwich - 320k
5. Colchester - 310k
6. Wickford - 290k
7. Ipswich - 270k
8. Rayleigh - 260k
9. Witham - 220k
10. Manningtree - 140k

 

[Adrian1980uk]

Using the Origin/Destination matrix data from the other thread, here's the top destinations for London Liverpool St along the GEML:

1. Chelmsford - 940k
2. Shenfield - 560k
3. Billericay - 390k
4. Norwich - 320k
5. Colchester - 310k
6. Wickford - 290k
7. Ipswich - 270k
8. Rayleigh - 260k
9. Witham - 220k
10. Manningtree - 140k

I'm surprised Norwich is slightly more than Colchester and more than Ipswich on that table, just by numbers of trains calling at destinations, I'd expect Ipswich to be higher up the league than Norwich

GA run a "boringly reliable" service day in day out and NR Anglia infrastructure plays nicely as well so that clearly has helped support repeat custom to drive up revenue. Also sounds like Treasury/DfT will support improvements when the finances are good.

Will always be my argument, if the TOC is paying into the Treasury then they should be allowed more freedom to try to increase revenue, all fits together in GA region at the moment but better to 3 tph reliably rather than 4tph but only in perfect circumstances and by cancellation ending up with 3tph by default

 

[Class 170101]

Will the loop at the new Beauleiu Park station help much with pathing.

and isn't long enough for most Class 4 (and probably Class 6) Freights

 

[oliMw]

One seemingly attractive improvement would be a half hourly Cambridge - Norwich service. As I understand it that’s not possible due to the Ely junction. However, I see that GA are running a few relief stopping services from Norwich - Cambridge on GEML engineering work days. Albeit, the relief service departs 10 minutes after the scheduled service when it does run. What is it that allows the paths to be opened up to allow this (assuming that’s the case), and could it be expanded in the future?

 

[Class 170101]

Will probably depend on whether other operators have cancelled paths that would normally run and as such would normally be in the way. Additionally it will depend on whether operators want to provide such a service, requires units and crew, cost vs revenue.