(not) My Suggestion for a service from Nottingham to Glasgow via the S&C

[tbtc]

The idea of a service from Nottingham to Glasgow via the Settle & Carlisle (S&C) has been suggested on the “Northern” thread and the “TPE” thread. It gets suggested regularly on a variety of threads.

Not as bad as the “My solution for future uses for 442s/ HSTs/ 91s” threads, but pretty regularly. Whilst I can understand the desire to keep your favourite locos/ units in operation into the 2020s/ 2030s, I’m struggling to see the ongoing fascination with Nottingham – S&C – Glasgow.

If you want to link Glasgow to somewhere then what about Blackpool? Sunderland? Bradford? Hull? Metro Centre? Leuchars? Gatwick? Oxford? These never seem to get suggested.

If you want to link Nottingham to somewhere then wouldn’t a bigger priority be Coventry? Wolverhampton? Stoke? Manchester Airport? Doncaster? York? Cambridge? Stansted? Newcastle? Oxford? Blackpool? Hull? All of these places lack direct links to Nottingham (some of which existed but were chopped after privatisation) but don’t tend to crop up on here.

...but, no; it’s always “Nottingham to Glasgow up the S&C”...

Is it just some romantic yearning for the days of a “Thames Clyde Express” when trains carried pretty headboards (before clockface timetables on main lines replaced such quirky services)?

Is it working backwards to try to find a solution that involves the S&C being a busy mainline with fast long distance services (rather than just a Sprinter every couple of hours restricted to 75mph because of some slow freight that will be decimated over the next decade as the heavy industry fades away)?

Is it because you’re not aware that there’s a regular cross-platform interchange at Manchester Piccadilly (the hourly Norwich – Liverpool shares the same 13/14 island that the Manchester Airport – Glasgow does)?

Is it because you’re not aware that there’s a regular service from the East Midlands (Derby) to Glasgow (via York) every couple of hours (hourly from the East Midlands to Edinburgh)?

Is it a self-referential thing, whereby if enough enthusiasts suggest it, others will assume that there must be some significant demand (and therefore suggest it too)? So it builds and builds until it becomes Received Wisdom that these are the two UK cities most in need of a direct link (which must also be via Settle for some reason, rather than Manchester/ York).

Does it make a pretty shape when you crayon it onto a map (avoiding the ECML and WCML if you run it up the GSW, which is often suggested)?

Is it the “must be seen to swim against the tide” approach of some enthusiasts, who prefer an “alternative” to the mainstream of the busy ECML and WCML?

There are plenty of other pairs of cities/ conurbations that have no direct links (e.g. Liverpool has no service to Cardiff, Bristol or Oxford... Manchester has no service to Derby, Wakefield or Wrexham... Birmingham lost its Swansea services when Wales & West became Wales & Borders... Newcastle has no service to Hull, Bradford or Blackpool...) yet these are rarely mentioned if ever. What’s so special about “Nottingham to Glasgow up the S&C”?

(I’m not saying that there’s *no* demand from Nottingham to Glasgow – they are both decent sized cities with Universities/ sports teams/ cultural highlights/ tourists – I’m asking why a direct link between the two seems to be such a fascination rather than links between other cities – and always via the S&C rather than via faster routes?)

There's the future -- the S&C back up to 80-mph speeds (or more) and a new Nottingham to Glasgow service calling at Chesterfield, Sheffield, Leeds, Skipton, Settle, Appleby, Carlisle, Lockerbie (taking this wretched stop from the Manchester trains), and Motherwell -- using to the full the 185s' power and offering the good views from those big windows. One can but dream!

A Nottingham to Glasgow service via Carlisle would call at Sheffield and Leeds two of the largest populated cities in the country. Could be a nice little earner for a TOC, if such a service was ever introduced

It's a possibility, but Leeds-Glasgow via the S&C makes more sense as it's a faster route connecting two big cities, so a direct service would be lucrative.

Nottingham-Carlisle doesn't really add much, but I'd still welcome it providing it didn't adversely affect performance on each 'leg'.

Obviously, Nottingham-Glasgow via Leeds and Carlisle would be the dream, but it's quite aspirational.

maybe extend some of the Nottingham-Leeds services to Carlisle via the S & C?

I've always thought a Nottingham to Glasgow via Leeds, Carlisle and Dumfries would be a pretty useful route, I think one of the open access companies were looking at that for a while.

Some of us can remember :-
1S24 2130 St Pancras - Glasgow
1M98 2130 Glasgow - Nottingham
1S68 0830(?) St Pancras - Glasgow
1M86 1100(?) Glasgow - Nottingham

and many variants on this theme over the years

all via the S&C and the GSW

I also believe that an intercity service over the S and C could work. London/Leicester/Nottingham to Glasgow

I think it would have been a bit more popular prior to the Nottingham - Leeds service, if timed well it would be quicker than using Cross Country or East Coast services between the East Midlands, South Yorkshire and Leeds to Glasgow. If priced and timed well it would probably cover its costs, talking from experience there are quite a large number of passengers who do travel from the East Midlands to West Scotland

I think this forum needs a "Nottingham to Glasgow Klaxon" every time it gets mentioned, the forum seems obsessed with that particular route

I think bradders has a point...

 

[backontrack]

I agree. Leicester to Glasgow would make more sense. :P

I understand your point, but at the same time it's not that daft an idea. In fact, Renaissance Trains are playing to run a daily service that way as part of Glasgow Trains (which has recently been rebooted). It's planned to run via Lockerbie as opposed to via Glasgow SW.

 

[Iskra]

The idea of a service from Nottingham to Glasgow via the Settle & Carlisle (S&C) has been suggested on the “Northern” thread and the “TPE” thread. It gets suggested regularly on a variety of threads.

Not as bad as the “My solution for future uses for 442s/ HSTs/ 91s” threads, but pretty regularly. Whilst I can understand the desire to keep your favourite locos/ units in operation into the 2020s/ 2030s, I’m struggling to see the ongoing fascination with Nottingham – S&C – Glasgow.

If you want to link Glasgow to somewhere then what about Blackpool? Sunderland? Bradford? Hull? Metro Centre? Leuchars? Gatwick? Oxford? These never seem to get suggested.

Bradford and Sunderland often come up as under-served locations.

If you want to link Nottingham to somewhere then wouldn’t a bigger priority be Coventry? No Wolverhampton? No Stoke? No Manchester Airport? Yes Doncaster? No York? No Cambridge? No Stansted? No Newcastle? Maybe, if paths existed Oxford? No Blackpool? No Hull? Possibly All of these places lack direct links to Nottingham (some of which existed but were chopped after privatisation) but don’t tend to crop up on here.

...but, no; it’s always “Nottingham to Glasgow up the S&C”...

Is it just some romantic yearning for the days of a “Thames Clyde Express” when trains carried pretty headboards (before clockface timetables on main lines replaced such quirky services)? I can't speak for everyone, but I wasn't even alive when that train existed...

Is it working backwards to try to find a solution that involves the S&C being a busy mainline with fast long distance services (rather than just a Sprinter every couple of hours restricted to 75mph because of some slow freight that will be decimated over the next decade as the heavy industry fades away)? No. It's 60mph anyway.

Is it because you’re not aware that there’s a regular cross-platform interchange at Manchester Piccadilly (the hourly Norwich – Liverpool shares the same 13/14 island that the Manchester Airport – Glasgow does)? People prefer direct trains.

Is it because you’re not aware that there’s a regular service from the East Midlands (Derby) to Glasgow (via York) every couple of hours (hourly from the East Midlands to Edinburgh)? It's slower than over the S and C and involves XC!!!

Is it a self-referential thing, whereby if enough enthusiasts suggest it, others will assume that there must be some significant demand (and therefore suggest it too)? So it builds and builds until it becomes Received Wisdom that these are the two UK cities most in need of a direct link (which must also be via Settle for some reason, rather than Manchester/ York). It's still faster via Settle.

Does it make a pretty shape when you crayon it onto a map (avoiding the ECML and WCML if you run it up the GSW, which is often suggested)? It still links more under-served or unlinked towns/cities... ...I wouldn't send it up the GSW, that would be ludicrous

Is it the “must be seen to swim against the tide” approach of some enthusiasts, who prefer an “alternative” to the mainstream of the busy ECML and WCML? It's clearly not swimming against the mainstream view. It is the mainstream view, as your quotes demonstrate. Do the ECML and WCML have the spare capacity?

There are plenty of other pairs of cities/ conurbations that have no direct links (e.g. Liverpool has no service to Cardiff, Bristol or Oxford... Manchester has no service to Derby, Wakefield or Wrexham... Birmingham lost its Swansea services when Wales & West became Wales & Borders... Newcastle has no service to Hull, Bradford or Blackpool...) yet these are rarely mentioned if ever. What’s so special about “Nottingham to Glasgow up the S&C”


(I’m not saying that there’s *no* demand from Nottingham to Glasgow – they are both decent sized cities with Universities/ sports teams/ cultural highlights/ tourists – I’m asking why a direct link between the two seems to be such a fascination rather than links between other cities – and always via the S&C rather than via faster routes?) It's not faster on the ECML or WCML!


You seem to be suggesting that we're talking about a service that is only serving Glasgow and Nottingham. Yet, Nottingham-Glasgow via Settle involves a lot of different journey opportunities and links enough different towns and cities to be of value, as well has having some end to end value.

I think bradders has a point...

See bold comments

(but, yes it does come up a lot and is now getting 442/XC serving Brighton-ish. Although this one is much more realistic)

 

[deltic]

Glasgow to Leeds is a large market which is not really very well served and many would argue Scotland to East Midlands and South Yorkshire has considerable potential. There is still the daily Corby-Glasgow coach service going back to when people in Lanarkshire moved to the steel works at Corby.

Most other cities pairs mentioned are relatively small although i would suggest Liverpool is probably the largest city region with the poorest links in terms of direct services

 

[backontrack]

I think that Nottingham to York is a possibility, Iskra.

 

[nottinghamcity]

If you want to link Glasgow to somewhere then what about Blackpool? Sunderland? Bradford? Hull? Metro Centre? Leuchars? Gatwick? Oxford? These never seem to get suggested.

If you want to link Nottingham to somewhere then wouldn’t a bigger priority be Coventry? Wolverhampton? Stoke? Manchester Airport? Doncaster? York? Cambridge? Stansted? Newcastle? Oxford? Blackpool? Hull?

Some of these existed long after privatisation. Central trains served Stoke and Manchester airport via the skegness - Man airport service, Coventry via the Nottingham- Birmingham airport service, the Liverpool service alternated to Blackpool, and at the other end Cambridge and stanstead (and Norwich) all of which were lost during CTs occupancy, or the end of the franchise. Wolverhampton is no different to all west Midlands destinations - easy connection at new St. And Hull? Why would anyone want to go there there are occasional services to Cleethorpes, and that is bad enough
I once had the misfortune of making a journey from Glasgow to Nottingham during the WCML rebuilding and work at Newcastle, routed via the S&C. It was interminable!

 

[backontrack]

Some of these existed long after privatisation. Central trains served Stoke and Manchester airport via the skegness - Man airport service, Coventry via the Nottingham- Birmingham airport service, the Liverpool service alternated to Blackpool, and at the other end Cambridge and stanstead (and Norwich) all of which were lost during CTs occupancy, or the end of the franchise. Wolverhampton is no different to all west Midlands destinations - easy connection at new St.
And Hull? Why would anyone want to go there there are occasional services to Cleethorpes, and that is bad enough

Because it's better than Nottingham at least.

 

[yorksrob]

I think Glasgow to Blackpool might be quite a good one, particularly as the Northern part of the WCML isn't generally over full.

I notice that TCBC mentions Glasgow - Gatwick as one that doesn't get mentioned. However XC services to Brighton (which would surely include Gatwick) often gets suggested, yet always seems to get shot down in indignation!

 

[backontrack]

I notice that TCBC mentions Glasgow - Gatwick as one that doesn't get mentioned. However XC services to Brighton (which would surely include Gatwick) often gets suggested, yet always seems to get shot down in indignation!

As did I!

Surely Heathrow would be a better destination?

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

That Nottingham to Doncaster idea sounds good.
I suggested extending the Worksop train to Retford once.
But got critized for it.

Liverpool will get a Glasgow TPE service in future franchise.
But it still needs better, as does Sunderland, Middlesbrough, Bradford, Hull, Stoke, and Sheffield aswell as many more.
The Settle And Carlisle line should be used for local services, not long distance such as Nottingham to Glasgow as it'll be faster going to Manchester first.

 

[southern442]

Nottingham to Glasgow sounds like something from that "ideas for new services" thread a year ago or so. However, Iskra does make an interesting point about spare capacity. The ECML and WCML are full, in particular the latter. This does indeed make you think about where extra England-Scotland services, which are in large demand, would fit in with the current timetable, and the S&C has loads of spare capacity. So perhaps whilst it is unlikely that we will get a Nottingham to Glasgow service in the next timetable, the idea of using other, more rural lines compared to busy trunk routes is interesting and might be worth a discussion.

 

[nottinghamcity]

I think one issue is that the Anglo Scottish routes have really strong competition from the budget airlines. Generally 4 hours city centre to city centre for most routes. There is also a perception, often incorrect, that rail is more expensive. This means that for many people, 4-6 hours is about the limit, before skyscanner.net gets consulted. I seem to remember my journey on the S&C was about 8, and I arrived wishing I had flown. In fact I could have driven it in that time. The long fast routes I think are quite important.

 

[Iskra]

I think one issue is that the Anglo Scottish routes have really strong competition from the budget airlines. Generally 4 hours city centre to city centre for most routes. There is also a perception, often incorrect, that rail is more expensive. This means that for many people, 4-6 hours is about the limit, before skyscanner.net gets consulted. I seem to remember my journey on the S&C was about 8, and I arrived wishing I had flown. In fact I could have driven it in that time. The long fast routes I think are quite important.

Out of interest, can you detail the route/traction you took please?

 

[nottinghamcity]

Out of interest, can you detail the route/traction you took please?

It was a 221 back in the virgin cross country days. I guess 2005. Nottingham- Derby, (change) then to Leeds diverted to Carlisle, then WCML to Glasgow. Lancaster to Carlisle was closed for the WCML upgrades, and Durham - Newcastle closed too. I guess the S&C was seeing a fair bit of diversionary traffic, there was a lot of caution running.

 

[Iskra]

It was a 221 back in the virgin cross country days. I guess 2005. Nottingham- Derby, (change) then to Leeds diverted to Carlisle, then WCML to Glasgow. Lancaster to Carlisle was closed for the WCML upgrades, and Durham - Newcastle closed too. I guess the S&C was seeing a fair bit of diversionary traffic, there was a lot of caution running.

That doesn't look like a typical journey time.

Can anyone remember the end to end journey time of the Arriva Trains Northern Leeds-Glasgow service c.2005? In order to give us a decent comparison.

Taking the following three services and stringing them together as if they were one service gives 5 hours 58 mins as an end to end journey time.

0712 Nottingham- Leeds (NT), 2 hours 5mins. (Including a 14 minute dwell at Sheffield)
0947 Leeds-Carlisle (NT, daily fast service), 2 hours 27 mins
1306 Carlisle-Glasgow (TP- timed for 100mph, rather than 90 as a 158 ought to be) 1 hour, 26mins

I don't think that is so uncompetitive with a journey 30mins quicker but with 2 changes at Manchester and Preston, or journey times about the same going via York. It would obviously be even more competitive if the Settle-Carlisle journey had 100mph+ stock (I'm not personally advocating that) like XC and VT's trains currently used compared to Northerns 158's.

 

[cle]

Haha this has turned into exactly what the OP hates...

But in seriousness, I think it is because Nottingham is a good place to terminate from that direction - and the service would also cover Sheffield/Leeds to Glasgow.

Nottingham to Glasgow itself is probably tiny.

Much like the oft-told St Pancras to Manchester idea: London to Manchester is all fine, but Luton, Bedford, Leicester and Derby to Stockport/Manchester could have legs...?

 

[backontrack]

Haha this has turned into exactly what the OP hates...

Let's face it, it was always going to.

It's likely that we'll all be labelled as 'deluded crayonistas' in a minute, but I'm enjoying this discussion and I can't really see how talking about a Nottingham-Scotland service is a heinous crime, really. I think that tbc may have just inadvertently created the Nottingham to Glasgow 'master thread'...

 

[Iskra]

Let's face it, it was always going to.

It's likely that we'll all be labelled as 'deluded crayonistas' in a minute, but I'm enjoying this discussion and I can't really see how talking about a Nottingham-Scotland service is a heinous crime, really. I think that tbc may have just inadvertently created the Nottingham to Glasgow 'master thread'...

I'm petitioning Grand Central about a new service as we speak

 

[tbtc]

I understand your point, but at the same time it's not that daft an idea. In fact, Renaissance Trains are playing to run a daily service that way as part of Glasgow Trains (which has recently been rebooted)

I can see an Open Access company desperately looking round the map to try to find a gap in the market that isn't directly served already, or is just a copy of two existing services - since they have to ensure that it's not primarily abstractive.

That's why Open Access come up with ideas like Swindon to Birmingham, to try to exploit a niche between existing TOC boundaries.

That's different to the way that any TOC (or the DfT) would do sensible planning though

The Renaissance plan of Blackpool - Glasgow made more sense as a direct service, given the amount of people from Clydeside who go on holiday there or even retire there (with the "Bluenose" bars etc). That's a clear market.

Coventry? No Wolverhampton? No Stoke? No

Ah, so Nottingham doesn't need a link to large conurbations in the Midlands, but does need a direct service to Glasgow almost three hundred miles away?

People prefer direct trains

Well, yes, but that's a fairly vague argument that could be used to justify a direct link between any places. Why is a direct link from Nottingham to Glasgow so desirable?

I wouldn't send it up the GSW, that would be ludicrous

Some enthusiasts do suggest the GSW. Anyone care to justify this?

It's clearly not swimming against the mainstream view. It is the mainstream view, as your quotes demonstrate. Do the ECML and WCML have the spare capacity?

Please don't confuse the "mainstream" with "what a lot of enthusiasts want"...

Does the WCML have spare capacity? Well, you don't want to use the GSW, so presumably you think that it does?

Part of the reason that the ECML and WCML struggle for capacity is that they serve a lot of busy places en route - rather than Settle/ Appleby.

You seem to be suggesting that we're talking about a service that is only serving Glasgow and Nottingham. Yet, Nottingham-Glasgow via Settle involves a lot of different journey opportunities and links enough different towns and cities to be of value, as well has having some end to end value

Yes, I get that it links lots of different places, I just can't understand why people are so fascinated with linking these places with a direct train (rather than hundreds of other combinations of routes).

I could draw a line on a map that serves much bigger places than the ones that you want to serve (Nottingham to Glasgow wouldn't serve anywhere of significant size between Leeds and Motherwell) .

You've said yourself that a "mainstream" of enthusiasts want this service, but where's the beef? What's the main selling point (other than it being relatively scenic)?

It's slower than over the S and C and involves XC!!!

Wait... we need a direct Nottingham to Glasgow train because people prefer direct services, but people won't use the existing service from the East Midlands to Glasgow because it's not fast enough?

Which way do you want it?

Glasgow to Leeds is a large market which is not really very well served

Well, there's a direct train every two hours from Glasgow to Leeds, which is the best service that it's had in as long as I can tell - possibly ever?

How much more frequent does it need to be?

Some of these existed long after privatisation. Central trains served Stoke and Manchester airport via the skegness - Man airport service, Coventry via the Nottingham- Birmingham airport service

I remember doing Coventry - Nottingham in Central Trains days vie Nuneaton and Leicester.

Coventry is a reasonably sized city, about an hour's drive away from Nottingham (fifty miles?), but I don't remember seeing demands for a direct service (yet Glasgow, almost three hundred miles away...)

Wolverhampton is no different to all west Midlands destinations - easy connection at new St

Ah, so Nottingham to Glasgow should exist because people prefer direct trains, but Nottingham doesn't need direct services to other places as long as there's one change?

You can do Nottingham to Glasgow by changing at Derby, Chesterfield, Sheffield, Manchester or Leeds - which surely gives a number of options - so why does Nottingham to Glasgow require a direct service (because a same-platform-interchange at Manchester Piccadilly isn't good enough?) whilst Nottingham apparently doesn't need direct services to other places in the Midlands?

I think Glasgow to Blackpool might be quite a good one, particularly as the Northern part of the WCML isn't generally over full

Well, I see comments that a Nottingham service would need to go to Glasgow up the S&C because the WCML is too full, yet apparently the northern end of the WCML isn't very full - yet 99% of the passenger services from Preston/ Lancaster/ Penrith to Carlisle continue up the WCML to Lockerbie/ Carstairs.

Freight will be dwindling away on the WCML over the next decade too.

I notice that TCBC mentions Glasgow - Gatwick as one that doesn't get mentioned. However XC services to Brighton (which would surely include Gatwick) often gets suggested, yet always seems to get shot down in indignation!

When Brighton is mentioned, the northern destination never seems to be settled upon - it's more of a "why can't we have some different services and a couple of randomly timed trains a day to Kensington Olympia like BR did" rather than agreement on whether a Brighton service would go to Manchester or Leeds or anywhere else.

Nottingham to Glasgow sounds like something from that "ideas for new services" thread a year ago or so. However, Iskra does make an interesting point about spare capacity. The ECML and WCML are full, in particular the latter. This does indeed make you think about where extra England-Scotland services, which are in large demand, would fit in with the current timetable, and the S&C has loads of spare capacity. So perhaps whilst it is unlikely that we will get a Nottingham to Glasgow service in the next timetable, the idea of using other, more rural lines compared to busy trunk routes is interesting and might be worth a discussion.

...but if the WCML is so busy then how are you going to run from Carlisle to Glasgow? Up the GSW?

Much of the freight on the WCML is going to be questionable over the next ten years, as "traditional"/ heavy industries decline.

I can't really see how talking about a Nottingham-Scotland service is a heinous crime, really

It's certainly no crime - I just can't understand the continuing fascination for linking these two places.

Sadly the replies I've had so far aren't shedding any light on why these two cities deserve a direct link (whilst lots of potentially bigger markets from each city have no such link).

I'm beginning to think that so many people suggest it because so many people suggest it (rather than any real need).

 

[Starmill]

I have never understood Nottingham to Glasgow.

However, what might be useful is West Yorkshire to Glasgow via Settle and Carstairs, because West Yorkshire doesn't have particularly useful links to Glasgow and Western Scotland at present - the fastest way is on XC direct via Edinburgh. There would be scope to improve that if you could make best use of the speed between Carlisle and Glasgow and also increase the speed between Leeds and Carlisle. The latter however would be very expensive. The former is a good idea but how much room is there left on this line? Certainly a 75mph DMU would not do the job. You might even need EPS 125 to path it properly. This would also achieve the ambition for faster services to Leeds and Carlisle for Settle and Appleby, but would not be possible without the order of new stock.

Is it a priority? West Yorkshire to Glasgow? Not really...
Will it cost a lot of money? New stock and line speed improvements to the S&C? Yes
Is it worth it in the long term? Possibly

For the record tbtc, I often mention that journeys Nottingham (and Derby) to Manchester (and of course Manchester Airport) are too slow and need some work - I would absolutely prioritise this.

 

[me123]

I personally think that Nottingham to Glasgow is a key gap in the market that an open access operator should exploit. Routing via the S&C line and then onto the G&SW is essential for the success of the route, which would provide crucial services to Dumfries and the Nith Valley. Of course, rolling stock is an issue, but the 442s that are about to become available would certainly provide a sensible solution, being about the right length for the capacity needed. Of course, 3rd rail not being available on the route is a concern, but that could be easily overcome with haulage from double-headed Deltics. I think we'd all agree that that would be HELLFIRE!!!

OK, I'm not being serious.

I've never understood the fascination with Nottingham as a destination. Living in Glasgow for most of my life, I can't say that Nottingham was a destination that's really on my radar, or anyone else's for that matter. I'm sure there are people who travel between the two cities, and there would be people that would use the link. Indeed, there must be a reason that flyby serve the GLA-EMA route. But it's not the most significant destination that comes to mind. Liverpool and Blackpool are two unserved routes that I would argue have much more demand.

I used to support the notion for a route via the S&C. This was back in the days when Glasgow lacked a good service to Leeds, back when East Coast still served Glasgow 2-hourly and XC provided a token service. Of course, they've now flipped around, providing Glasgow with a regular direct service to both Leeds and Sheffield once every two hours. From those stations, there are plenty of connections available, including Nottingham. I have to say that Glasgow is better served by regular XC trains than it was from the EC services, albeit I'll admit that XC provide an inferior service.

Other than the personal enthusiasm I'd have for a direct train from Glasgow over the S&C, I can't really see this being the most important missing link on the network. There's much better use of the capacity on the Northern WCML.

 

[sprinterguy]

I think that Nottingham could do with more direct trains north, to link together a number of possible destinations. After the opening of HS2 Phase 2, which should have a dramatic impact on the travellers between Birmingham and North East England, then I think that a Nottingham to Glasgow service would be a good idea, mainly to keep Sheffield and Leeds connected to Scotland's two largest cities.

As such, I would think that a Nottingham to Glasgow service would realise far greater revenues if it were to run via the ECML and pick up passengers making intermediate journeys from and to Sheffield, Leeds, York, Darlington, Newcastle, Berwick and Edinburgh. I don't see the attraction of running via the S&C where, after Leeds, the only prominent centre of population you encounter is Carlisle. The majority of prospective end to end passengers would still make the journey over the longer route because of the convenience of it being a direct train.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I can't speak for everyone, but I wasn't even alive when that train existed...

Nor was I, but as a constant student of railway history and lore I do appreciate the nostalgic sentiment surrounding once-a-day named trains such as the "Thames-Clyde Express". It's a pleasing image, a big dirty locomotive of a past age hauling a long string of compartment carriages steadily onwards over the Northern fells...however I don't think that it has much relevance to modern day travel demands.

It's clearly not swimming against the mainstream view. It is the mainstream view, as your quotes demonstrate. Do the ECML and WCML have the spare capacity?

Don't make the mistake of assuming that this forum speaks for the majority: Like most internet forums, this is primarily an echo chamber for a minority of enthusiasts; the majority view is that of the everyday passenger "out there" in the real world.

 

[TheWalrus]

I think they should merge Nottingham-Leeds and Leeds-Carlisle into a through service creating more through journey opportunities using the same resources.

 

[adrock1976]

In regards to the suggestion of Glasgow - Nottingham direct services via Appleby being reinstated, don't forget that the Midland Railway built the S & C as a mainline route for Intercity services so as to connect the East Midlands and the West Riding of Yorkshire with Scotland.

If you think about it, there is no harm in suggesting that some services are put back as how they were before, which are perceived to be useful. Using that logic, remember that the BBC brought back Doctor Who, Cadbury's brought back Wispa bars, and Sheffield, Manchester, Nottingham, and Croydon have brought back trams.

 

[The Planner]

Much of the freight on the WCML is going to be questionable over the next ten years, as "traditional"/ heavy industries decline.

Which will all get backfilled by Intermodal, the expectation of Class 4 growth is large on the WCML.

 

[glbotu]

I think they should merge Nottingham-Leeds and Leeds-Carlisle into a through service creating more through journey opportunities using the same resources.

The reason they don't is that you have to cross all of Leeds station throat for this to work. Given this is the reason they're spending hundreds of millions of pounds on the Ordsall Chord in Manchester (stopping trains crossing the whole of Piccadilly station throat), I'd suggest it's not a great idea.

 

[cuccir]

The reason that Nottingham-Glasgow gets raised here more often than almost any other service is that it is both one of a group of half-dozen potential long distance services that seem vaguely feasbile and doable and, of those services, its use of the S&C gives it a particular appeal to many enthusiasts. It's this mixture which means that it is raised regularly here.

We've identified, I think, the 'romance' angle of the service fairly well. It is also, though, worth pointing out that Not-Gla is one of the more plausible long distance services to be created. There's capacity; there are services, albeit limited, which currently run part of the route (Sunday Nottingham-Carlisle); the two urban areas (working on the ONS' definitions) have the 2nd largest combined population of two unconnected cities in the GB*.

Of course, you're correct to point out that there might be a number of local connections that would better serve Nottingham. I think it should be quite clear why local services are going to be generally less prominent on a national forums; people without knowledge of the area are going to be less intrigued and interested by local services. And of course, the question of regional v national connectivity is a complex one which doesn't have easy answers. I don't know if Nottingham is better served by services to Glasgow or to Coventry; it would be misunderstanding human geography to presume that proximity = a desire/need to travel, but equally regional interconnection can drive local economies. In practice a careful balance of both is important.

I don't know if Not-Gla is the best currently absent long-distance service suggestion, or use of stock/capacity, but I can see why it would appear quite frequently here: it is probably the most 'romantic', or at least enthusiast-friendly, of all reasonably imaginable long distance services.


* If you're interested, I'm discounting Liverpool-Glasgow which is now scheduled to start running, and the top 5 is:
1. Glasgow - South Hampshire ("Portsthampton")
2. Glasgow - Nottingham
3. Liverpool - South Hampshire
4. Glasgow - Leicester
5. Glasgow - Brighton
I'm also aware that this is not a perfect measure (a service to Leeds may be of less use if you live in Bradford) but it is still a decent indicator.

 

[lyndhurst25]

If an East Midlands to Glasgow service is being proposed then how about starting it at Corby? Corby has a large Scottish population and because of this National Express run a daily Corby to Glasgow coach service. The coach takes 10 hours 40 minutes - surely a train via the S&C line could beat that?

 

[DarloRich]

This suggestion is spotter wibble coupled with nostalgia for an old service some may have memories of with an added bit of crayonistaism chucked in and a desire by spotters to link every city in the UK to every other city in the UK regardless of whether, or not, there is any demand for such a service.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'm petitioning Grand Central about a new service as we speak

Couple that with Bradford Crossrail* and you're on to a winner!

OK, there's the small matter of a shopping centre in the way now, but no biggie...